Cole v. State
| Docket Number: | 2004-CP-01353-COA Linked Case(s): 2004-CT-01353-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-17-2006 Opinion Author: King, C.J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Factual basis - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes and Ishee, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Roberts, J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-06-2004 Appealed from: Simpson County Circuit Court Judge: Robert G. Evans Disposition: PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: 2001-44K |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Ronald Lamar Cole, Sr. |
RONALD LAMAR COLE, SR. (PRO SE) |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
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 - Factual basis - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Ronald Cole, Sr. pled guilty to two charges of touching a child for lustful purposes. He was sentenced to five years on each charge, to run consecutively, and was ordered to register as a sex offender upon his release. Cole filed a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Cole argues that his plea of guilty was unintelligently and involuntarily entered into because the trial court failed to ascertain that he was in fact guilty before accepting his guilty plea. When a defendant enters into a guilty plea while maintaining his innocence, he has entered what is known as an Alford plea, in accordance with North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970). Alford holds that an express admission of guilt is not constitutionally required in order to be punished criminally. The record clearly shows that the court ascertained that Cole understood the plea which he was entering. Issue 2: Factual basis Cole argues that there existed an insufficient factual basis upon which to accept his plea. A concise statement of the facts which establish the crime, and the facts which support the investigation and apprehension of the defendant is adequate to establish the needed factual basis. Here, the assistant district attorney’s statements were sufficiently specific to show that Cole’s conduct was within the amount of that defined as criminal. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Cole argues that his attorney persuaded him to plead guilty by misleading him as to the true meaning of an Alford plea and any sentences that he would receive once he pled. The record shows that after conferring once more with his attorney, Cole decided to enter the Alford plea and receive his sentence. He even stated, “I would like to apologize to my attorney. He’s done an excellent job. I shouldn’t have said what I did.” Cole has failed to prove that his attorney’s performance was deficient, and that the attorney’s performance prejudiced him in any way. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
