Mock v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-CP-01883-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-13-2011 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Claim of relief - Section 99-39-9(2) - Disproportionate sentence Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Myers, J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-11-2010 Appealed from: Prentiss County Circuit Court Judge: James L. Roberts Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: CV2010-000 337JR |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Brian Ray Mock |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: STEPHANIE BRELAND WOOD |
|
|
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 - Claim of relief - Section 99-39-9(2) - Disproportionate sentence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Brian Mock pled guilty to several charges and was sentenced according to his plea agreement with the State. Mock later filed a motion for post-conviction relief, which the court denied. Mock appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Mock is challenging four separate judgments in his single motion for post-conviction relief. Section 99-39-9(2) states that a motion shall be limited to the assertion of a claim for relief against one judgment only. Therefore, dismissal of Mock’s motion on this ground would have been proper. Mock argues his sentence was grossly disproportionate to those of his co-defendants. The general rule in this state is that a sentence cannot be disturbed on appeal so long as it does not exceed the maximum term allowed by statute. Mock received the sentences to which he had agreed, and since the court followed the State’s recommendations for sentencing, he was fully aware of the sentences that he would receive. The sentences were also within the statutory maximums for the crimes. Furthermore, the co-defendants were not indicted on all four counts addressed in this appeal. Accordingly, the circuit judge did not err in finding that the sentences imposed were not grossly disproportionate to the other defendants’ sentences. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
