Williams v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-CP-01728-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CT-01728-SCT ; 2010-CP-01728-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-14-2012 Opinion Author: Russell, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Factual basis for pleas - URCCC 2.04 - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Right to speedy trial Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Fair, J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-30-2010 Appealed from: Sunflower County Circuit Court Judge: Margaret Carey-McCray Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: 2010-0006-M |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Brian Williams |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOHN R. HENRY JR. |
|
|
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 - Factual basis for pleas - URCCC 2.04 - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Right to speedy trial |
| Summary of the Facts: | In February 2010, Brian Williams filed a PCR motion. In April 2010, Williams filed a motion to stay proceedings, which also requested permission to amend his February 2010 PCR motion. The circuit court never ruled on his motion to stay proceedings or his request to amend his PCR motion. In May 2010, Williams filed an amended PCR motion. In September 2010, the circuit court denied Williams’ PCR motion. Williams appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Factual basis for pleas Williams argues that the circuit court erred by not determining whether there was a factual basis for his guilty pleas. The State argues Williams failed to raise this issue in his February 2010 PCR motion and therefore, the issue is barred. A prisoner must move to amend his PCR motion within thirty days of filing. Williams’s motion to amend was filed more than thirty days after his PCR motion was filed. Further, he failed to secure a ruling on his motion to amend as required by URCCC 2.04. Therefore, the voluntariness of his guilty pleas is not properly before the Court. In addition, Williams failed to provide any evidence that his guilty pleas were not voluntarily given. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Williams argues that his attorney rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by insisting that Williams plead guilty. In support of his argument, Williams included an affidavit from his mother, who heard Williams tell his attorney that he did not want to accept a plea deal. Williams’s claim that his attorney coerced his guilty pleas was not raised in his February 2010 PCR motion and is, therefore, not properly before the Court. In addition, Williams provides no evidence to show his attorney’s alleged actions caused him to plead guilty. Issue 3: Right to speedy trial Williams argues his federal and state rights to a speedy trial have been violated. By entering valid guilty pleas, however, Williams waived his constitutional and statutory rights to a speedy trial. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
