Whitfield v. State
| Docket Number: | 2011-CP-00395-COA Linked Case(s): 2011-CP-00395-COA ; 2011-CT-00395-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-26-2012 Opinion Author: Robert P. Chamberlin Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Amendment of indictment - URCCC 7.09 - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving, P.J., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell, Russell and Fair, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-27-2010 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: Griffis, P.J. Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED Case Number: CV2010-0137RCD |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Shaun Whitfield a/k/a Shaun Eldon Whitfield |
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 - Amendment of indictment - URCCC 7.09 - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Shaun Whitfield pled guilty to possession of precursors. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to twenty years, with ten years to serve, and ten years of post-release supervision. He was also fined $5,000. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was dismissed. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Amendment of indictment Whitfield argues that he did not knowingly enter a guilty plea as a habitual offender because he was unfairly surprised by the amendment of his indictment. URCCC 7.09 provides that indictments may be amended to charge the defendant as a habitual offender. The only limitation on amendment is that the defendant must be afforded a fair opportunity to present a defense and is not unfairly surprised. The record shows that Whitfield knew the State was seeking habitual-offender status. His signed plea petition explicitly stated his wish to enter a plea of guilty as a habitual offender. The judge began the plea hearing by informing Whitfield that the State had filed the motion to amend, which, if granted, would subject Whitfield to a maximum sentence of thirty years to be served day for day. Whitfield stated under oath that he and his attorney had reviewed the plea petition and the plea offer from the State, and that he wanted to plead guilty. At his sentencing hearing, he declined all opportunities to present a defense to the amendment. Instead, Whitfield admitted both of his prior felony convictions and agreed to be sentenced as a habitual offender. Thus, there is no merit to this issue. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Whitfield argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. In cases involving post-conviction collateral relief, where a party offers only his affidavit, then his ineffective assistance of counsel claim is without merit. Whitfield provides no support for this claim other than his own statement. He argues that his counsel should have objected to the amendment of his indictment, but the record is clear that Whitfield himself had an opportunity to object. Further, Whitfield told the judge that he was satisfied with his representation and that he had no complaints about his attorney. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
