Moss v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2005-CP-00689-COA
Linked Case(s): 2005-CP-00689-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 07-18-2006
Opinion Author: Irving, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of pleas - Venue - Section 99-11-19 - Ineffective assistance of counsel
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ.
Procedural History: PCR
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 03-07-2005
Appealed from: Alcorn County Circuit Court
Judge: Sharion R. Aycock
Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED.
District Attorney: JOHN RICHARD YOUNG
Case Number: CV04-280(A)A

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Reginald Joe Moss




REGINALD JOE MOSS (PRO SE)



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: DEIRDRE MCCRORY  

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 pleas - Venue - Section 99-11-19 - Ineffective assistance of counsel

Summary of the Facts: Reginald Moss pled guilty to murder, kidnapping, grand larceny, and arson. The court sentenced him to life for the murder conviction and to ten years for the kidnapping conviction, to run consecutively to the life sentence. For the grand larceny conviction, Moss was sentenced to five years, to run consecutively to the sentence imposed for murder but concurrently with the sentence imposed for kidnapping. On the arson conviction, the court sentenced him to three years to run consecutively to the sentences imposed for murder and grand larceny but concurrently with the sentence imposed for kidnaping. Moss filed a motion for post-conviction relief which the court dismissed. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Voluntariness of pleas Moss argues that his guilty pleas were not knowingly and intelligently made because when he entered them, he was under the influence of prescribed medication. The trial court extensively questioned Moss to determine whether he was entering a knowing and voluntary plea. As part of the process, the court specifically asked Moss if he had taken or ingested any substance which would affect his ability to completely understand and appreciate the proceedings and the questions asked by the court. Moss’s responses clearly contradict Moss’s contention that he was suffering from the ill effects of prescribed medication when he entered his guilty pleas. Issue 2: Venue Moss argues that the State erred in establishing venue in Alcorn County, because venue was proper in Tishomingo County where the victim’s death occurred. The State’s offer of proof, which Moss admitted was correct, clearly established that Moss commenced his series of crimes by severely beating the victim and slashing her throat at a residence in Corinth, which is in Alcorn County. Therefore, jurisdiction was proper in Alcorn County under section 99-11-19 even though the victim’s ultimate death may have not occurred there. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Moss argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to conduct any sort of investigation into the facts surrounding the crime, deposing or preparing witnesses, and wholly failing to structure any kind of coherent theory of defense. Nothing in the record indicates that Moss’s trial counsel was deficient in any way. In fact, the record contains numerous motions filed by Moss’s counsel in an effort to aid his defense. Additionally, Moss’s trial counsel successfully negotiated with the district attorney’s office to get the original charge, capital murder, reduced to murder.


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