118 So. 3d 656
Miss. Ct. App.2013Background
- Jordan was indicted for capital murder and later amended as a habitual-offender case; he pled guilty to capital murder as a habitual offender and was sentenced to life without parole; nearly ten years later, he moved for post-conviction relief alleging the indictment was fatally defective for omitting armed-robbery elements; the circuit court denied as untimely and meritless; on appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the denial.
- At the guilty-plea hearing, the court questioned Jordan about his rights; the prosecution proposed to prove he and his brother followed the victim from Walmart to the victim’s home and that Jordan shot the victim in the head twice.
- Jordan’s PCR motion was filed December 7, 2011, asserting the indictment failed to include armed-robbery elements; the circuit court denied it as untimely and lacking merit.
- The Mississippi three-year PCR deadline is generally applicable to defective-indictment claims; Jordan’s judgment of conviction was entered January 8, 2002, making the deadline January 8, 2005, thus his motion was nearly seven years late.
- There were authorities discussing tolling exceptions and fundamental-right tolling, but Jordan did not claim an applicable tolling event.
- The court ultimately held that the PCR motion was untimely and, independently, that the indictment was not fatally defective because armed-robbery elements need not be detailed in a capital-murder indictment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the PCR motion was timely filed. | Jordan | State | Untimely; three-year limit applied. |
| Whether the capital-murder indictment was fatally defective for omitting armed-robbery elements. | Jordan | State | Not defective; armed robbery elements not required to be elaborated. |
| Whether tolling or exceptions saved the timely filing of PCR. | Jordan | State | No tolling applicable; no established exception present. |
| Whether other PCR claims depend on indictment defect. | Jordan | State | No merit; distinct issues collapse with defect claim. |
| Whether the circuit court’s rulings on the PCR motion were correct on the merits if untimely. | Jordan | State | Affirmed; court properly denied both timeliness and merit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Callins v. State, 975 So.2d 219 (Miss. 2008) (standard for factual review on PCR; law questions de novo)
- Moss v. State, 45 So.3d 305 (Miss.Ct.App.2010) (indictment defect claims subject to three-year limit)
- Rowland v. State, 42 So.3d 503 (Miss.2010) (fundamental-right tolling can toll the statute of limitations)
- Williams v. State, 94 So.3d 324 (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (indictments for capital murder and robbery guidance; not all robbery elements required)
- Milano v. State, 790 So.2d 179 (Miss.2001) (robbery-based capital murder indictments; scope of elements)