Cook v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-02166-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-16-2008 Opinion Author: Roberts, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Section 99-39-9(2) - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Right to appeal Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, and Carlton, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-29-2006 Appealed from: PIKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Michael M. Taylor Disposition: DENIED MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF Case Number: 06-324-PCS |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | PATRICK O’NEAL COOK |
PATRICK O’NEAL COOK (PRO SE) |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY | ||
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 - Section 99-39-9(2) - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Right to appeal |
| Summary of the Facts: | Patrick Cook pled guilty to one count of unlawful possession of at least five kilograms but less than six kilograms of marijuana with the intent to distribute and two counts of the unlawful sale of more than one ounce of marijuana and the unlawful possession of less than one ounce of marijuana with the intent to distribute. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Pursuant to section 99-39-9(2), Cook is only able to challenge the validity of his conviction from one judgment per motion for post-conviction collateral relief. Since all issues raised within his PCR motion, and on appeal, appear to concern unlawful possession of at least five kilograms but less than six kilograms of marijuana with the intent to distribute, except for one, the Court will consider his PCR motion for that count. Cook argues that his guilty plea was involuntary as a result of improper conduct by agents of the MBN. His sole basis for his contention that his guilty plea was involuntary is completely contradicted by the record. Cook argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel. During his plea hearing, Cook was asked whether he was satisfied with his attorney’s performance, and he responded that he was. Cook claims that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the illegal indictments. However, Cook does not state why the indictments were illegal or any specific reason why his trial attorney would have been justified in objecting to them. Cook argues that the trial court failed to inform him that the right to directly appeal his sentence would still be available regardless of his plea of guilty. A trial court is not required to inform a defendant who pleads guilty of his right to appeal the resultant sentence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
