Johnny Ray Sims v. State of Mississippi, 227 So. 3d 1167

In 2005 Johnny Ray Sims pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated assault arising from a police chase that caused two car crashes; two related counts were dismissed but the court ordered restitution to accident victims.
Sims was sentenced to 20 years (with a short active term and postrelease supervision) and later had postrelease supervision revoked after a capital murder charge.
Sims filed two prior PCR motions (2007 and 2008); the second was dismissed as time-barred/successive and on the merits; this Court affirmed (Sims I) and the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed (Sims II).
In February 2016 Sims filed a third PCR motion again challenging the restitution order as an illegal sentence because restitution was ordered as to a dismissed count.
The trial court dismissed the third PCR as a successive writ and frivolous, finding no factual basis to excuse the procedural bar and that the claim lacked merit in light of prior appellate holdings.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding Sims failed to overcome successive-writ procedural bars and that the illegal-sentence claim was without merit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the PCR was barred as a successive writ	Sims argued claim involves an illegal sentence (fundamental right) and court must reach the merits	State argued prior dismissals are final judgments and bar successive PCRs; no basis shown to overcome the bar	Affirmed: successive-writ bar applies; Sims failed to show basis to overcome it
Whether ordering restitution for a dismissed count created an illegal sentence	Sims asserted restitution to victim of dismissed count made sentence illegal	State pointed to prior opinions finding waiver and that court may impose restitution for any victim who suffered pecuniary damages	Held: claim without merit — prior decisions rejected the illegal-sentence argument
Whether res judicata or procedural rules prevent re-litigation of constitutional claims	Sims relied on cases noting res judicata generally doesn't apply to constitutional claims	State argued mere assertion of constitutional violation is insufficient; must show basis for truth to overcome bars	Held: procedural bars stand unless movant shows some basis for truth; Sims did not meet that burden
Whether the PCR motion was frivolous and sanctionable	Sims contended dismissal as frivolous was improper	State argued repeated relitigation of resolved claims justified frivolous finding and warning	Held: trial court did not abuse discretion in labeling motion frivolous and warning of sanctions

Sims v. State, 134 So. 3d 317 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (appellate decision rejecting Sims’s earlier PCR claims)
Sims v. State, 134 So. 3d 300 (Miss. 2014) (supreme court affirming prior PCR disposition and addressing restitution/waiver)
Fluker v. State, 170 So. 3d 471 (Miss. 2015) (holding mere assertion of a constitutional violation does not waive procedural bars absent some basis for truth)
Smith v. State, 149 So. 3d 1027 (Miss. 2014) (discussing limits of res judicata for constitutional claims)
Rowland v. State, 42 So. 3d 503 (Miss. 2010) (explaining exceptions to successive-writ bar for fundamental constitutional rights)
Bosarge v. State, 141 So. 3d 24 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (recognizing relief from an illegal sentence as a fundamental constitutional right)