Henry R. Monroe v. State of Mississippi
203 So. 3d 1140
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Monroe pleaded guilty (May 21, 2013) in Madison County to manufacturing >1 kg marijuana as a subsequent offender and was sentenced to 20 years with 6 years to serve and 5 years post-release supervision (PRS); two other counts were nolle prossed in exchange for the plea.
- Monroe filed a counseled PCR motion (June 9, 2015) alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to present mitigating evidence (macular degeneration/medical use of marijuana).
- The trial court summarily dismissed the PCR motion after reviewing the plea and sentencing transcripts and the criminal file.
- On appeal Monroe abandoned his ineffective-assistance claim and instead argued (for the first time) he was entitled to a reduced sentence or modified supervision under the trusty-time-allowance statute (Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-138.1) as amended by House Bill 585.
- The Court of Appeals found Monroe’s new statutory arguments procedurally barred because they were not raised below and did not implicate a fundamental right; it also held the statutory amendment did not change his entitlement and that trusty-time allowances apply to custody credits, not to reduce PRS length.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Monroe is entitled to a sentence reduction under § 47-5-138.1 based on 2014 amendments | Monroe: HB 585 amended § 47-5-138.1 so he is entitled to reduced sentence / shorter PRS | State: Monroe raised this for the first time on appeal; the relevant amendment did not affect his conviction and trusty-time applies only to custody credits | Procedurally barred; alternatively meritless — § 47-5-138.1 grants thirty-for-thirty credits in custody and does not reduce PRS length |
| Whether Monroe’s PRS should be converted from supervised to unsupervised | Monroe: Wants unsupervised status to travel and seek medical marijuana | State: Sentence (including supervised PRS) was within statutory limits and is within trial court’s discretion | Procedurally barred; also not reviewable because the sentence was lawful and within trial court discretion |
| Whether failure to raise these issues below is excused by a fundamental-rights exception | Monroe: Did not allege a fundamental-rights violation | State: No fundamental rights implicated; issues are waived | Court: No fundamental-rights exception applies; procedural bar stands |
| Whether Monroe received trusty-time credits while incarcerated | Monroe: Asserts entitlement but provides no MDOC documentation; claims release May 2015 | State: MDOC records showed earned-release supervision and no record of current custody; no evidence credits were denied | Court: No evidence credits were withheld; issue speculative and not properly raised below |
Key Cases Cited
- Hughes v. State, 106 So. 3d 836 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (standard of review for PCR dismissal and de novo review of legal questions)
- Bass v. State, 174 So. 3d 883 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015) (issues not raised in trial court are procedurally barred on appeal)
- Rowland v. State, 42 So. 3d 503 (Miss. 2010) (fundamental-rights errors are exceptions to waiver rules)
- Smith v. State, 477 So. 2d 191 (Miss. 1985) (same — discussing exceptions for fundamental rights)
- Hoops v. State, 681 So. 2d 521 (Miss. 1996) (sentencing within trial court’s discretion if within statutory limits)
- Johnson v. State, 925 So. 2d 86 (Miss. 2006) (distinguishing supervised vs. unsupervised post-release supervision and the court’s monitoring role)