282 So.3d 714
Miss. Ct. App.2019Background
- In 2015 Howard Hays pled guilty to commercial burglary and auto theft and received consecutive habitual-offender day-for-day sentences (7 and 5 years).
- Hays filed a first PCR in March 2016 raising ineffective assistance, lack of timely initial appearance, unlawful detention, and charging defects; the circuit court summarily denied it in July 2017 and Hays did not timely appeal.
- In September 2017 Hays filed a second PCR repeating prior claims and adding others (Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims, illegal sentence, defective indictment, etc.).
- The circuit court summarily dismissed the second PCR as an impermissible successive writ under the UPCCRA.
- On appeal, Hays conceded procedural bar but argued numerous constitutional violations and sought to invoke exceptions to the successive-writ bar; the Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hays) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Successive PCR bar | Hays argued his claims should be considered despite prior denial | State argued UPCCRA bars successive PCRs unless exception applies | Court held motion was successive and barred under UPCCRA |
| Timely initial appearance | Hays alleged denial of timely initial appearance | State noted claim was raised and rejected in first PCR and guilty plea waived non-jurisdictional defects | Court held claim was waived by guilty plea and cannot be relitigated |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Hays claimed counsel was ineffective and this can excuse the bar | State pointed out Hays previously raised the claim and failed to show extraordinary circumstances | Court held Hays failed to establish the exception or new basis; claim barred |
| Fourth Amendment / cross-examination / indictment defects / unconstitutional statute / illegal sentence | Hays asserted multiple constitutional violations (illegal arrest, lack of confrontation, defective indictment, wrong larceny charge, illegal sentence) | State argued these claims are either non-fundamental and waived by guilty plea or were previously raised/unsupported; only certain "fundamental" rights survive the bar and Hays gave no factual basis | Court held non-fundamental claims waived by plea or procedurally barred; Hays failed to show basis to invoke exceptions for illegal sentence or other fundamental-rights exceptions |
Key Cases Cited
- Gunn v. State, 248 So. 3d 937 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018) (standards for reviewing PCR denials)
- Evans v. State, 115 So. 3d 879 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (UPCCRA bars successive PCR motions)
- Davis v. State, 954 So. 2d 530 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (valid guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional rights)
- Rowe v. State, 735 So. 2d 399 (Miss. 1999) (guilty plea operates as waiver of certain trial defects)
- White v. State, 59 So. 3d 633 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (mere assertions of constitutional violations do not overcome procedural bar)
- Green v. State, 235 So. 3d 1438 (Miss. Ct. App. 2017) (enumerating fundamental-rights exceptions to PCR bar including illegal sentence)
- Lyons v. State, 990 So. 2d 262 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (cannot relitigate issues decided in prior PCR)
- Brown v. State, 187 So. 3d 667 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (ineffective assistance may, in extraordinary circumstances, excuse procedural bars)