Townes v. State
| Docket Number: | 2011-CP-00710-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-15-2012 Opinion Author: Russell, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Newly discovered evidence - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Constitutionality of section 97-3-7 - M.R.A.P. 28(a)(6) Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Fair, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-29-2011 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: Robert P. Chamberlin Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED Case Number: CV2010-0201 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Marquis T. Townes a/k/a Marquis Townes |
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 - Newly discovered evidence - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Constitutionality of section 97-3-7 - M.R.A.P. 28(a)(6) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Marquis Townes pled guilty to aggravated assault. He was sentenced to 15 years and 117 days, with 117 days to serve and 15 years suspended and 15 years of post-release supervision. Two years later, ten years of Townes’s suspended sentence was revoked for his failure to pay restitution and his commission of new crimes. Townes filed a motion for post-conviction relief which the court dismissed. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Newly discovered evidence Townes argues that his conviction and sentence should be overturned because he has new evidence of a material fact – namely, that he was acting in self-defense at the time of the assault. However, Townes’s PCR motion consists of nothing more than his own version of the incident and an allegation that he was acting in self-defense. This defense was available to Townes at the time of his guilty plea. When a defendant pleads guilty, he is admitting that he committed the offense. Therefore, by definition, a plea of guilty negates any notion that there is some undiscovered evidence which could prove his innocence. Thus, because Townes entered a plea of guilty, he cannot now claim he was acting in self-defense. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Townes testified under oath at his plea hearing that he was satisfied with the services provided by his attorney. Townes further testified that he did not have any complaints about his attorney. Declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity. Further, a trial court is entitled to place great weight upon a defendant’s initial plea under oath. Thus, this claim is without merit. Issue 3: Constitutionality of section 97-3-7 Townes argues that the aggravated-assault statute is unconstitutional. However, Townes fails to cite any authority to support his assertion. Therefore, his argument is procedurally barred under M.R.A.P. 28(a)(6). |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
