Smith v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-CA-01934-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-CA-01934-COA ; 2007-CT-01934-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-02-2008 Opinion Author: ROBERTS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Due process rights Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, and Carlton, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: King, C.J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-20-2007 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: Robert P. Chamberlin Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: CV2007-0211CD |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | CHESTER SMITH, JR. |
JOHN D. WATSON |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: LADONNA C. HOLLAND | ||
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 - Due process rights |
| Summary of the Facts: | Chester Smith, Jr., pled guilty to armed robbery. The court originally sentenced Smith to thirty years, with twenty years to serve followed by ten years post-release supervision. However, because the circuit court was concerned about remarks and nonverbal communications by Smith that could reasonably be interpreted as threatening, the circuit court did not file Smith’s sentencing order. Additionally, the circuit court instructed escorting authorities to report back if Smith made more threatening remarks. After two law enforcement officers heard Smith make threatening remarks, the court had Smith brought back before the court and sentenced Smith to serve thirty years in the custody of the MDOC with no portion of that sentence suspended. Smith filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Smith argues that the circuit court violated his rights to due process because his attorney did not receive written notice of what Smith terms his “resentencing” or, alternatively, the hearing on the “revocation of his suspended sentence.” However, Smith was not re-sentenced, nor was his suspended sentence revoked. The record plainly demonstrates that the circuit court only sentenced Smith once. In addition, a circuit court has inherent authority to alter a sentence until a regular term of court expires. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
