Wright v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2010-CP-00294-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 03-15-2011
Opinion Author: Roberts, J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Post-conviction relief - Ineffective assistance of counsel
Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving, P.J., Griffis, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Procedural History: PCR
Nature of the Case: PCR

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 01-21-2010
Appealed from: Warren County Circuit Court
Judge: M. James Chaney, Jr.
Disposition: Motion for Post-Conviction Relief Denied
Case Number: 09,0128CI

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Jeremy Wright




PRO SE



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: BILLY L. GORE  

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

Summary of the Facts: Jeremy Wright pled guilty to a single count of armed robbery. He was sentenced to twenty years. Wright filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Wright argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Wright asserts that his attorney’s actions were deficient when he failed to pursue a motion to suppress Wright’s confession and, instead, recommended that Wright plead guilty to one count of armed robbery. When a criminal defendant has solemnly admitted in open court that he is in fact guilty of the offense with which he is charged, he may not thereafter raise independent claims relating to the deprivation of his constitutional rights that occurred prior to the entry of the guilty plea. Wright is prohibited from raising any constitutional violation issues that occurred before he entered his guilty plea, including the voluntariness of his confession, the inadmissibility of his confession due to an illegal arrest and interrogation, and the failure to provide him with an initial appearance without unnecessary delay. At Wright’s guilty-plea hearing, the circuit judge thoroughly questioned Wright, under oath, about the voluntariness of his guilty plea. By entering a valid guilty plea, Wright explicitly waived any right to suppress the alleged coerced confession. Wright clearly indicated at his guilty-plea hearing that he was satisfied with the advice and representation his attorney provided. Wright also indicates his satisfaction with his attorney and his attorney’s representation when he signed the petition to enter plea of guilty.


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