Mason v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CP-00311-COA
Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 08-17-2010
Opinion Author: Barnes, J.
Holding: Affirmed.
Additional Case Information: Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Procedural History: PCR; Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF; Dismissal
Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 01-30-2009
Appealed from: LINCOLN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Judge: David H. Strong
Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED
Case Number: 2008-442-LS
  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Christopher Mason




 PRO SE



  
Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LAURA HOGAN TEDDER  
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
Summary of the Facts: Christopher Mason pled guilty to possession of more than five kilograms of marijuana with intent to distribute. He was sentenced to twenty years, with eight years to serve, twelve years suspended, and five years of post-release supervision. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was dismissed. He appeals.
Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Mason challenges the validity of his guilty plea through his counsel’s alleged ineffectiveness. A plea is voluntary and intelligent if the defendant is advised concerning the nature of the charge against him and the consequences of the plea. The transcript of the plea hearing shows Mason testified under oath in open court that he was guilty as charged. Mason was fully advised by the trial judge of the nature of the charge, the effect of the plea on his rights, and the possible sentence. Mason responded affirmatively when asked by the trial judge if he understood the rights he was waiving and his possible sentence. There is no evidence in the record to indicate that Mason’s plea was invalid. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Mason argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. During the plea hearing, Mason testified that he was satisfied with the services of his counsel: he had been with Mason at all stages of the proceeding, answered all of Mason’s questions, and explained the elements of the crime to Mason. Thus, there is no merit to Mason’s contention that his guilty plea was invalid because of his counsel’s ineffectiveness. Mason argues his counsel was ineffective for failing to suppress evidence of the fifteen pounds of marijuana, which were seized from his vehicle, as the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Mason was initially stopped for reckless driving. The officer smelled the odor of marijuana emanating from the stopped vehicle, thereby establishing probable cause to search the vehicle. It was also discovered that Mason was driving illegally with a revoked driver’s license; therefore, Mason was placed under arrest. Accordingly, there was no unreasonable search and seizure. Mason also argues that he was denied the right to a speedy trial because of his counsel’s deficient performance. Mason executed a “Waiver of Arraignment” on January 3, 2008, thus triggering his statutory right to a speedy trial, but he then entered a plea of guilty on April 1, 2008. Thus, there was no violation of the statutory right to a speedy trial. With regard to his constitutional right, Mason did not assert the right, making it difficult to prove his claim. There was no prejudice to Mason as he was only incarcerated for fifteen days after his arrest, and then he was out of jail on bond until he pleaded guilty in April 2008.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court