HICKS v. STATE
| Docket Number: | 2009-CP-01100-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-20-2010 Opinion Author: King, C.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Jurisdiction - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: PCR; Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-27-2009 Appealed from: TATE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Andrew C. Baker Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED Case Number: CV2008-0527BT |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Robert E. Hicks |
PRO SE |
|
|
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: W. GLENN WATTS |
|
|
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 - Jurisdiction - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Robert Hicks filed a pro se motion to vacate and set aside his conviction of burglary of a dwelling house and sentence of twenty years. The court dismissed Hicks’s motion without benefit of a hearing. Hicks appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Jurisdiction Hicks argues that the indictment failed to allege intent, an essential element in the offense of burglary of a dwelling, thereby depriving the Tate County Circuit Court of the jurisdiction to accept his guilty plea or to sentence him. In the multi-count indictment, Hicks was charged in Count One with conspiracy to commit burglary, in Count Two with burglary of a dwelling house, in Count Three with grand larceny, and in Count Five with possession of a concealed weapon. Hicks pled guilty to Count Two, and all other charges were remanded to the file. The issue that Hicks actually attempts to raise for the first time on appeal is not a jurisdictional one, but rather a question of whether the indictment was defective. A valid guilty plea waives all non-jurisdictional defects to an indictment. Because Hicks entered a guilty plea as to Count Two, he waived all claims to non-jurisdictional defects to Count Two of the indictment. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Hicks argues that defense counsel failed to investigate the facts of the charged offense; erroneously advised him to enter a guilty plea, which resulted in his pleading to a fatally defective indictment; and failed to object to the untimely filing of the victim impact statement. Hicks’s argument of ineffective assistance of counsel as to the indictment is dependent upon a finding that the indictment failed to allege the essential element of intent and, therefore, was fatally defective. Count Two of the indictment does, in fact, conform to the language of the statute; thus, it is not defective. Since the indictment was not defective, Hicks’s contention that his plea was not voluntary because of his counsel’s erroneous advice regarding the indictment is not supported by the record. Hicks argues that the victim impact statement was not provided to him until the day of sentencing. Because Hicks failed to object to the untimely submission of the victim impact statement during the plea hearing, he waived his right to raise this argument on appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
