Fleming v. State, 97 So. 3d 1234

Fleming was convicted in 1993 of sale of cocaine and in 1994 of possession of cocaine (both felonies).
In 2000, he was convicted of two more felonies: sale of cocaine and sale of marijuana, leading to habitual-offender sentencing due to two prior felonies.
His habitual-offender sentence was affirmed by this Court and the Mississippi Supreme Court denied certiorari in 2002.
In 2009, the circuit court expunged Fleming’s 1994 conviction.
In 2010, Fleming sought post-conviction relief to be resentenced as a non-habitual offender based on the expungement.
The circuit court denied relief, and Fleming appealed, arguing timeliness and entitlement to resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the post-conviction relief motion time-barred?	Fleming argues an exception applies due to intervening authority.	State contends no applicable exception; motion untimely.	Motion time-barred; no successful exception shown.
Should Fleming be resentenced as a non-habitual offender because of expungement?	Expungement of the 1994 conviction entitles non-habitual status.	Habitual-offender statute prohibits reduction of sentence once imposed.	No entitlement to resentencing; expungement does not alter habitual status.

Martin v. State, 66 So.3d 1288 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (clear error standard; de novo for issues of law)
Smith v. State, 806 So.2d 1148 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (standard for post-conviction relief)
Brown v. State, 731 So.2d 595 (Miss. 1999) (de novo review for legal questions)
Glenn v. State, 940 So.2d 969 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (intervening decisions under statute §99-39-5(2)(a)(i))
Oaks v. State, 912 So.2d 1075 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (intervening decisions not shown; time bar applies)
Berry v. State, 907 So.2d 1011 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (habitual-offender purpose; longevity of criminal pattern)
Jackson v. State, 381 So.2d 1040 (Miss. 1980) (rehabilitative purpose of expungement statutes)