Hamlin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-CP-00933-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-19-2003 Opinion Author: Thomas, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Factual basis - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-13-2002 Appealed from: Alcorn County Circuit Court Judge: Paul S. Funderburk Disposition: DENIAL OF POST-CONVICTION RELIEF. District Attorney: John Richard Young Case Number: CV01-482 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Jerry Lane Hamlin |
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DEIRDRE MCCRORY |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | PRO SE |
|
|
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 - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jerry Hamlin pled guilty to one count of armed robbery and was sentenced to thirty years with twenty years suspended and placed on five years' post release supervision. Hamlin filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Factual basis Hamlin argues that the record does not contain an adequate factual basis to support his guilty plea to the charge of armed robbery, because he did not admit to the fact that he was armed. Though it is unclear that Hamlin ever unequivocally admitted at the plea hearing that the bulge in his pocket was a deadly weapon, such an admission is not necessary to a guilty plea so long as the court is satisfied that the State has probative evidence tending to establish the essential elements of the crime. Here, the State produced evidence of a visible bulge indicating an item concealed on Hamlin's person together with his affirmative contemporaneous assertion that he was armed. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Hamlin argues that his counsel was ineffective, because he lied to the trial court, attempted to induce perjured testimony and gave up on the adversarial process. To prove his claim, he must show his attorney’s conduct was deficient and prejudicial. His allegation must be alleged with specificity. Because Hamlin fails to support his assertions with any factual basis or supporting affidavits, his assertions lack the specificity and detail required to establish a prima facie showing. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
