Chancy v. State
| Docket Number: | 2004-CT-02036-SCT Linked Case(s): 2004-CT-02036-SCT ; 2004-CP-02036-COA ; 2004-CP-02036-COA |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-21-2006 Opinion Author: Waller, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Newly discovered evidence - Time bar Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Cobb, P.J., Diaz, Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Easley and Graves, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF Writ of Certiorari: Yes Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-20-2004 Appealed from: Rankin County Circuit Court Judge: William E. Chapman, III Disposition: In 1995, Chancy pled guilty to two counts of armed robbery, and he was sentenced to thirty-one years. In 2004, he filed a pleading under the Mississippi Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act which the circuit court dismissed as being time barred. District Attorney: David Byrd Clark Case Number: 2004-52(C) |
|
| Note: | The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeals’ affirmance of the dismissal of Chancy’s post-conviction relief petition, but found that the Court of Appeals erred when it found that the newly discovered evidence exception of the PCR statute of limitations did not apply to petitioners who pled guilty. See the original COA opinion at http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO30850.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Ronnie Lynn Chancy |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS |
|
|
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 - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Newly discovered evidence - Time bar |
| Summary of the Facts: | In 1995, Ronnie Chancy pled guilty to two counts of armed robbery, and he was sentenced to thirty-one years. In 2004, he filed a motion for post-conviction relief which the court dismissed as being time barred. The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s order. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Chancy argues that his guilty plea was involuntarily entered due to ineffective assistance of counsel, because he entered the guilty plea based on the expectation of being sentenced to 10 years, but, instead, he was sentenced to 31 years’ imprisonment. He presents the affidavits of his mother and his sister which aver that Chancy’s counsel informed his mother that, if he pled guilty, Chancy would be sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. Chancy claims this is newly discovered evidence because he only learned of it when his mother first visited him in 2001. The Court of Appeals held that newly discovered evidence is relevant only in situations where a defendant went to trial and was convicted. However, that is incorrect. In fact, the Court of Appeals itself has recognized the newly discovered evidence exception in the context of guilty pleas in a number of cases. In this case, the exception does not apply because the information contained in the affidavits is not newly discovered evidence. In his sworn petition for post-conviction relief, Chancy admits that he knew about the alleged plea agreement in 1995 when he pled guilty. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
