Fair v. State
102 So. 3d 1165
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Fair indicted in Coahoma County on two burglary counts (I and II) and one conspiracy count (III) with a multi-count indictment; State sought habitual-offender designation but no order entered.
- Fair pleaded guilty to all three counts on February 20, 2009 and was sentenced to 20 years on each burglary count and 5 years for conspiracy, with all sentences concurrent; State agreed not to pursue habitual-offender sentencing.
- PCR filed February 25, 2010 and was denied by the circuit court without an evidentiary hearing.
- Fair raised six assignments of error, including double jeopardy, ineffective assistance, involuntary pleas, lack of admission of elements, right to appeal, and entitlement to an evidentiary hearing; court affirmed the denial.
- Standard of review: de novo for questions of law and clear error standard for PCR findings; and the court analyzed each assignment of error.
- Note: Some motions (severance and indictment amendment) were not reduced to written orders in the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Double jeopardy with multi-count indictment | Fair | Fair contends multi-count indictment subjects him to multiple punishments | Meritless; three separate offenses rendered distinct punishments; no double jeopardy violation. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Fair | Counsel failed to challenge the multi-count indictment | Meritless; no showing of deficient performance or prejudice; plea strategy and record support validity. |
| Involuntary pleas | Fair | Pleas coerced by unlawful indictment | Meritless; pleas knowingly and voluntarily entered based on plea colloquy. |
| Admission of elements of the charges | Fair | Elements not acknowledged during plea | Meritless; State read charges including elements and Fair admitted committing the offenses. |
| Right to appeal sentences | Fair | Guilty plea barred direct appeal; relief via PCR | Meritless; direct appeal not allowed after guilty plea under amended statute; PCR appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bailey v. State, 19 So.3d 828 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (double jeopardy requires proof of acquittal, second prosecution, or multiple punishments)
- Greenwood v. State, 744 So.2d 767 (Miss. 1999) (double jeopardy analysis guidance in MS cases)
- Stovall v. State, 873 So.2d 1056 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (conspiracy to commit burglary is a separate offense from the completed burglary)
- Bell v. State, 754 So.2d 492 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999) (presumption of reasonableness of counsel; waiver principles in plea contexts)
- Speagle v. State, 956 So.2d 237 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (waiver when movant fails to obtain ruling on motions; procedural respect to URCCC 8.04)
- Shanks v. State, 906 So.2d 760 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (direct-appeal limitations after guilty plea under MS law)