Ward v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-CP-01365-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-21-2006 Opinion Author: Lee, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Double jeopardy - Illegal sentencing order - Evidentiary hearing Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Myers, P.J., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-01-2005 Appealed from: Rankin County Circuit Court Judge: Samac Richardson Disposition: DENIED MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF. Case Number: 2003-163R |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | David Ward |
DAVID WARD (PRO SE) |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JACOB RAY |
|
|
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 - Double jeopardy - Illegal sentencing order - Evidentiary hearing |
| Summary of the Facts: | David Ward pled guilty to possession of more than two grams, but less than ten grams of cocaine; possession of more than thirty grams, but less than 250 grams of marijuana; and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was sentenced to serve twenty-two years. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief, and the plea, conviction, and sentence were set aside and the case was set back on the docket for trial. Ward again pled guilty to the same charges and was sentenced to twenty years, seventeen years to serve and three years of post-release supervision. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was dismissed. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Ward argues that double jeopardy was violated because the State failed to prove separately the elements of possession of a controlled substance and conspiracy to possess a controlled substance. A reading of the charges in the indictment shows that Ward was not charged with conspiracy. Ward argues that the sentencing order was illegal because the trial court did not enter separate judgments or verdicts. This issue is without merit since Ward was sentenced separately on each charge. Ward argues that the court erred by not conducting an evidentiary hearing. Ward has not presented any facts which would entitle him to relief, and, therefore, the trial court did not err by not conducting an evidentiary hearing. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
