Lay v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-CP-00633-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CP-00633-COA ; 2010-CT-00633-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-21-2011 Opinion Author: Irving, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Illegal sentence - Lesser-included offenses Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Griffis, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Russell, J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-28-2009 Appealed from: Scott County Circuit Court Judge: Marcus D. Gordon Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED Case Number: 09-CV-178-SC-G |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Willie Ray Lay |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL | ||
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 - Illegal sentence - Lesser-included offenses |
| Summary of the Facts: | Willie Lay pled guilty to simple murder and burglary of a dwelling. Lay was sentenced to life for the murder and to twenty-five years for the burglary. More than nine years later, Lay filed a motion for post-conviction relief in the circuit court, alleging that his burglary conviction is illegal. The court dismissed the motion, and Lay appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Generally, a movant has three years in which to file a motion for post-conviction relief after entering a plea of guilty. Movants are also prohibited from filing successive writs challenging their convictions. However, errors affecting fundamental constitutional rights are excepted from procedural bars, such as the three-year time limit and the prohibition against successive writs. An illegal sentence is an error affecting a fundamental constitutional right. The question on appeal is whether burglary is a lesser-included offense of capital murder as charged in Lay’s indictment. The indictment charged Lay with capital murder, with an underlying predicate offense of burglary. The capital murder could not be charged without also charging burglary. Therefore, the burglary as charged in Lay’s indictment, although an element of the crime of capital murder, also constituted a lesser-included offense of his capital-murder charge. Lay’s indictment also clearly put Lay on notice that he was charged with burglary as part of his capital-murder charge, which essentially had two separate lesser-included offenses: simple murder and burglary. As both simple murder and burglary constitute lesser-included offenses of the capital-murder charge in Lay’s indictment, his convictions and sentences for burglary and simple murder are entirely appropriate. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
