Carroll v. State
120 So. 3d 471
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Carroll pled guilty on February 11, 2004 to attempted robbery and was sentenced to 20 years with 9 to serve, 11 suspended, and 5 years of suspended incarceration on post-release supervision.
- As a condition of post-release supervision, Carroll was banished from the Third Circuit Court District; he did not object at the plea hearing.
- The plea transcript shows the prosecution requested banishment to aid rehabilitation and Carroll agreed, understanding it applied outside the Third Circuit counties.
- The court stated the banishment and related terms would be included to assist rehabilitation and to avoid disreputable persons and places.
- The PCR motion was dismissed; the record lacked a sentencing hearing transcript and on-the-record Cobb factor analysis, making it unclear whether the trial court addressed Cobb v. State factors.
- The court remanded to allow a complete on-the-record Cobb analysis and review of the banishment under Means/Mackey/McCreary; an ineffective-assistance claim was considered but held meritless on the record
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether banishment was properly analyzed under Cobb factors on the record | Carroll argues the record lacks an on-the-record Cobb analysis | State contends the record does not show the Cobb factors were articulated on the record | Remand to determine on-record Cobb analysis is required |
| Whether Carroll's ineffective-assistance claim is procedurally barred or meritorious | Carroll asserts ineffective assistance of counsel affected plea/sentencing | State argues procedural bars apply and claim lacks merit | IAC claim deemed barred/meritless on record; not the focus of remand for banishment factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Cobb v. State, 437 So.2d 1218 (Miss.1983) (establishes Cobb factors for banishment and necessity of on-record analysis)
- Means v. State, 43 So.3d 438 (Miss.2010) (confirms banishment requires on-record Cobb factors and retroactive application of Means approach)
- Mackey v. State, 37 So.3d 1161 (Miss.2010) (affirms on-record Cobb factors and retroactive application of Mackey requirements)
- McCreary v. State, 582 So.2d 425 (Miss.1991) (reiterates Cobb-based prohibition on broad banishment and rehabilitative considerations)
- Hamm v. State, 758 So.2d 1042 (Miss.Ct.App.2000) (early recognition of need for on-record Cobb-factor analysis)