204 So. 3d 774
Miss. Ct. App.2016Background
- In 2005 Albert L. McDonald pled guilty to multiple offenses after shooting his girlfriend, later killing two people and wounding two others; convictions included two counts of capital murder, three counts of aggravated assault, three counts of burglary of a dwelling, and one count of kidnapping.
- In 2015 McDonald (pro se) filed a post-conviction relief (PCR) motion asserting double jeopardy, defective indictments, coerced confession, and ineffective assistance of counsel.
- The Union County Circuit Court dismissed the PCR motion without an evidentiary hearing as procedurally barred and without merit; McDonald appealed.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed de novo whether summary dismissal was proper under Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-11(2) and the three-year PCR limitations statute, Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2).
- The court found the motion violated the rule that a PCR motion must attack only one judgment, was time-barred, and that McDonald’s guilty plea waived many non-jurisdictional defects.
- On the merits (in the alternative), the court rejected McDonald’s double jeopardy, indictment-defect, confession, and ineffective-assistance claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Double jeopardy from two capital-murder counts based on same felony | McDonald: two capital-murder convictions rested on same robbery, violating double jeopardy | State: each capital-murder count involved a separate victim; Blockburger elements differ | No double jeopardy violation; separate victims satisfy Blockburger; convictions stand |
| Multiple burglary counts for same house | McDonald: two burglary convictions charged same house/address | State: indictments and plea colloquy describe separate residences; McDonald admitted facts at plea | Rejected — factual basis and plea admissions show separate burglaries |
| Indictments defective for failing to specify underlying intent/larceny or lacking signatures | McDonald: indictments omitted the word "larceny," alleged different intents at plea, and some documents lacked signatures | State: language sufficiently alleged intent to steal; plea waives non-jurisdictional defects; record contains missing pages/signatures or none required | Defects waived by guilty plea; factual basis supported intents; no relief granted |
| Ineffective assistance / conflict of counsel | McDonald: counsel ineffective; conflict of interest | State: such claims do not fall into exceptions to the three-year time-bar and are not shown to implicate listed fundamental rights | Time-barred and without merit; claim rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- Powell v. State, 806 So. 2d 1069 (Miss. 2001) (explaining double jeopardy protections)
- Watkins v. State, 101 So. 3d 628 (Miss. 2012) (use of Blockburger test to evaluate double jeopardy)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (test whether each offense requires an element the other does not)
- Reeder v. State, 783 So. 2d 711 (Miss. 2001) (guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional defects)
- Windless v. State, 185 So. 3d 956 (Miss. 2015) (burglary intent may be proved circumstantially and inferred from conduct)
- Brandon v. State, 108 So. 3d 999 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (PCR motions must attack a single judgment)
- Salter v. State, 184 So. 3d 944 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015) (limits on PCR exceptions to the statutory time-bar)