223 So. 3d 805
Miss. Ct. App.2017Background
- In April 2013 Marquez Hickenbottom was indicted for armed robbery; he later pleaded guilty to strong-arm robbery in January 2014.
- Defense counsel raised concerns about Hickenbottom’s mental-health history; the trial judge ordered a psychiatric evaluation under the court’s competency procedures.
- State psychiatrist Dr. Mark Webb examined Hickenbottom, concluded he was competent to stand trial and to enter a plea, and testified at a competency hearing.
- The court accepted Hickenbottom’s guilty plea, sentenced him to 15 years’ incarceration, 5 years’ probation, and a $1,500 fine, retaining jurisdiction for one year.
- Hickenbottom filed a motion for postconviction relief (PCR) claiming (1) his plea was involuntary due to incompetence and (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; the circuit court denied and dismissed the PCR, and Hickenbottom appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competency of plea (voluntariness) | Hickenbottom: not competent due to mental illness, depression, past hospitalizations; State psychiatrist did not review all records | State/Trial court: court ordered evaluation, Dr. Webb found competence after review and hearing; plea colloquy showed understanding | Court affirmed: competency finding and voluntariness upheld; no evidence plea was involuntary |
| Adequacy of psychiatric evaluation | Hickenbottom: Dr. Webb failed to review all medical records and gave unreliable conclusions | State/Trial court: Dr. Webb reviewed offense reports and materials provided, testified to Hickenbottom’s intelligence and understanding; counsel cross-examined him | Court affirmed: evaluation and hearing satisfied Rule 9.06 concerns; judge reasonably relied on Dr. Webb |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel — failure to present insanity evidence | Hickenbottom: counsel failed to present insanity defense or his full mental-health history | State/Trial court: counsel raised mental-health concerns, had opportunity to cross-examine psychiatrist, and defendant expressed satisfaction with counsel; no showing of deficient performance or prejudice | Court affirmed: defendant failed to establish Strickland prongs; no prima facie ineffective-assistance claim |
| Procedural sufficiency of PCR dismissal | Hickenbottom: alleged facts warrant relief | State/Trial court: trial record, competency hearing, and plea colloquy negate claims | Court affirmed: dismissal was not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Hughes v. State, 106 So. 3d 836 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (standard of review for PCR dismissal)
- Watson v. State, 100 So. 3d 1034 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (trial court duty to order competency evaluation under reasonable-ground standard)
- Funchess v. State, 202 So. 3d 1286 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (standards for voluntariness of guilty plea and ineffective-assistance analysis)
- Brasso v. State, 195 So. 3d 856 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (due-process right not to be tried while incompetent)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)