177 So. 3d 1148
Miss. Ct. App.2014Background
- Allen pled guilty in 1995 to murder, manslaughter, and aggravated assault for a 1993 nightclub shooting that killed two victims and injured another.
- He received a life sentence for murder, plus 20 years for manslaughter and 10 years concurrent for aggravated assault.
- Allen's first post-conviction relief (PCR) motion was dismissed in 2003; the Mississippi Supreme Court mandate issued June 9, 2003.
- In 2013 Allen filed a second PCR motion seeking appointed counsel and asserting ineffective assistance and newly discovered evidence, which the circuit court dismissed as time-barred.
- The Mississippi appellate court affirmed dismissal, holding the defects were barred by time limits and the successive-writ rule, with no exception applicable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the PCR motion was time-barred | Allen's motion should be timely under the statutory exceptions | UPCCRA and timing bars foreclose review | Time-bar prevents relief |
| Whether the PCR motion is procedurally barred as a successive writ | Newly discovered evidence bailment creates exception | Previously dismissed PCR bars review | Successive-writ bar applies; no exception established |
| Whether ineffective assistance claims are exempt from the time-bar | Ineffective assistance and involuntary plea require review under exception | Bars apply; no substantive exception shown | No exception for ineffective assistance; barred |
| Whether the newly discovered evidence claim meets the statutory/newly discovered evidence exception | New evidence would yield different result if trialed | Evidence not practically conclusive or suitably corroborated | Exception not satisfied |
| Whether denial of counsel on PCR proceedings was error | Petitioner needed appointed counsel for PCR | No constitutional right to counsel in non-death PCR; discretion allowed | No error; no right to counsel required |
Key Cases Cited
- Crosby v. State, 16 So.3d 74 (Miss.Ct.App.2009) (UPCCRA bars some PCR claims)
- Chancy v. State, 938 So.2d 267 (Miss.Ct.App.2005) (ineffective-assistance standards apply in PCR)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Anderson v. State, 577 So.2d 390 (Miss.1991) (guilty plea waives many non-jurisdictional rights including speedy trial)
- Ellzey v. State, 196 So.2d 889 (Miss.1967) (waiver of speedy-trial rights in plea context)
- Dockery v. State, 96 So.3d 759 (Miss.Ct.App.2012) (plea-colloquy sufficient to show voluntariness)
- Smith v. State, 922 So.2d 43 (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (review of ineffective-assistance claims requires specific facts)
- White v. State, 59 So.3d 633 (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (statutory exceptions to procedural bars discussed)
- Grayson v. State, 118 So.3d 118 (Miss.2013) (PCR petitioners under death sentence have right to PCR counsel)
- Grayson v. State, 118 So.3d 118 (Miss.2013) (see discussion on procedural review of PCR petitions)