Rodolfich v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-CP-01135-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-28-2003 Opinion Author: Bridges, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: King and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: McMillin, C.J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-18-2002 Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court Judge: Stephen Simpson Disposition: POST-CONVICTION IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. District Attorney: Cono A. Caranna, II Case Number: Bridges, J. |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Matthew J. Rodolfich |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: BILLY L. GORE |
|
|
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 - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Matthew Rodolfich pled guilty to felony driving under the influence, his third offense. He was sentenced to serve five years, but his sentence was suspended and he was ordered to serve two years' probation. After confessing to violating the conditions of his probation, Rodolfich was ordered to serve the entire term. He filed two post-conviction relief motions which were denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Rodolfich argues that his sentence was unfair because he did not realize he could receive the maximum of five years at the time he pled guilty. A plea is voluntary if the defendant was advised of the nature of the charges against him, the rights which he would be waiving by pleading guilty, the maximum sentences that he could receive for the crimes with which he was charged and whether he was satisfied with the advice and counsel of his attorney. Even though others were present at the time he received his sentence, Rodolfich was informed of the implications of his guilty plea. The consequences of entering and signing the guilty plea were clearly explained in writing. Rodolfich clearly knew the nature of the charges against him, the rights he was waiving, and the maximum sentence he could receive. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Rodolfich argues that he did not have effective assistance of counsel, because his lawyer told him that he would receive a two year sentence and did not make him aware of the possibility of serving five years. To prove his claim, he must show his attorney’s conduct was deficient and prejudicial. Rodolfich's mere allegation that his lawyer was ineffective is not enough evidence to demonstrate that her performance was deficient. In addition, the record shows that his lawyer did in fact give her client adequate advice and assistance. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
