Bridges v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-00110-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-CP-00110-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-17-2007 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Evidentiary hearing Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts and Carlton, JJ. Procedural History: PCR; Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-08-2005 Appealed from: LOWNDES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Beverly Mitchell Franklin Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED. Case Number: 2004-0161-CV1 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | MICHAEL BRIDGES |
MICHAEL BRIDGES (PRO SE) |
||
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Evidentiary hearing |
| Summary of the Facts: | Michael Bridges pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine precursors as a prior drug offender. He was sentenced to thirty-four years. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Bridges argues that his guilty plea was entered involuntarily. In order to be voluntarily and intelligently entered, a defendant must be advised about the nature of the crime charged against him and the consequences of the guilty plea. When the trial court questions the defendant and explains his rights and the effects and consequences of the plea on the record, the plea is rendered voluntary despite advice given to the defendant by his attorney. The transcripts of the suppression, plea, and sentencing hearings reveals that the trial judge thoroughly examined Bridges and properly determined that he understood the consequences of his guilty plea and that the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Bridges argues that his counsel was ineffective during his suppression hearing, sentencing hearing, and the plea process. However, Bridges did not assert that his counsel was derelict in representing him at any point during the suppression, plea, or sentencing hearings. In fact, he indicated that he was satisfied with his attorney’s representation. Therefore, Bridges was not denied effective assistance of counsel. Issue 3: Evidentiary hearing Bridges argues that his motion for an evidentiary hearing should have been granted. Because there is no merit to any of the allegations made by Bridges, he is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
