270 So. 3d 1055
Miss. Ct. App.2018Background
- In 2001 Dahne Jones pleaded guilty to robbery and received a 10-year sentence: 4 years to serve and 6 years postrelease supervision (PRS).
- MDOC issued a show-cause and bench warrant in 2005 for failure to pay fines/costs and contempt; an MDOC affidavit (Aug 15, 2005) listed nine PRS violations (including positive drug tests, failure to report, failure to pay).
- Jones was not apprehended in 2005; he later committed crimes in Alabama and served a lengthy sentence there.
- After release on parole in Alabama (Aug 2, 2016), Mississippi authorities brought Jones back on the 2005 warrant; MDOC provided notices and a waiver of a preliminary hearing (which Jones refused to sign).
- At the August 31, 2016 revocation hearing two parole officers testified about the alleged PRS violations; the trial court revoked PRS and ordered Jones to serve the remainder of his sentence.
- Jones filed a postconviction-relief motion raising jurisdiction, notice, lack of preliminary hearing, ineffective assistance of counsel, and absence of a written statement; the trial court denied relief and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Jones: sentence expired in 2010; court lacked power to revoke in 2016 | State: revocation petition filed in 2005 tolled PRS; State acted reasonably upon Jones’s return | Court: petition tolled PRS; revocation timely upon his return — issue denied |
| Notice of violations | Jones: did not receive written notice of PRS violations | State: Jones admitted he received, read, and discussed the written notice | Court: Jones’s admission disposes of claim — issue denied |
| Preliminary revocation hearing | Jones: was denied a preliminary revocation hearing | State: failure to hold separate preliminary hearing was waived and harmless because full revocation hearing met due-process minima | Court: issue waived; no prejudice shown; full hearing satisfied due process — issue denied |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Jones: counsel failed to challenge timeliness, object to insufficient evidence, and coerced attendance | State: Jones offered only his own assertions without supporting affidavits or specificity; counsel’s performance presumed reasonable | Court: Jones failed Strickland burden; allegations too bare to warrant relief — issue denied |
| Written statement of reasons | Jones: trial court did not provide written reasons for revocation | State: court entered an order listing proven violations; transcript contains officer testimony supporting revocation | Court: revocation order and hearing testimony satisfy requirement — issue denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Leech v. State, 994 So. 2d 850 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (filing revocation petition within supervision tolls the supervision period)
- Jackson v. State, 483 So. 2d 1353 (Miss. 1986) (petition tolling avoids absurdity of same-day capture requirement)
- Loisel v. State, 995 So. 2d 850 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (enumerating minimum due-process protections for revocation hearings)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Price v. State, 132 So. 3d 1083 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (State acted within reasonable time to pursue revocation after return from out-of-state custody)