Reed v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-CP-00545-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CP-00545-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-20-2011 Opinion Author: Lee, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Section 99-39-5(1) - Time bar - Successive writ Judge(s) Concurring: Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-02-2010 Appealed from: Lauderdale County Circuit Court Judge: Lester F. Williamson Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: 8209 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Elius Lamar Reed |
PRO SE |
|
|
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LAURA HOGAN TEDDER | ||
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 - Section 99-39-5(1) - Time bar - Successive writ |
| Summary of the Facts: | In 1976, Elius Reed was convicted of armed robbery. Reed was sentenced to six years. Reed was paroled on March 30, 1979, and discharged from the custody of the MDOC on January 5, 1983. Reed filed a motion for post-conviction relief on December 4, 1990, which was denied by the trial court. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision in 1994. In 2008, Reed filed a motion for a new trial, alleging that he had newly discovered evidence that would prove his innocence. This evidence, which Reed admittedly received from the FBI in 2000, consisted of a 1976 fingerprint report which stated that “the latent fingerprints previously reported in this case are not identical with the fingerprints of Elius Lamar Reed.” The trial court denied Reed’s motion. Reed filed a motion to reconsider, which was denied. After Reed filed another motion to reconsider, the trial court assessed $150 in sanctions due to Reed’s continual filing of frivolous motions. In 2009, Reed filed another motion for post-conviction relief. The trial court denied the motion and assessed $1,000 in sanctions for frivolous filings. Reed appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Reed argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief. At the time he filed his first motion for post-conviction relief, Reed was not incarcerated or on parole or probation. Therefore, under section 99-39-5(1), Reed was not entitled to maintain a motion for post-conviction relief. Reed’s motion for post-conviction relief is also barred as untimely and as a successive writ. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
