McComb v. State
135 So. 3d 928
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Walter McComb pleaded guilty on June 3, 2004 to aggravated domestic violence and aggravated assault as a habitual offender and received concurrent 15-year, day-for-day sentences.
- McComb filed a first PCR motion on March 12, 2007; the circuit court denied it and this Court affirmed in McComb v. State (2008).
- On June 21, 2012 McComb filed a second PCR motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for: (1) failing to file a motion for bond relief; (2) advising him to bring money to his plea hearing to pay fines; and (3) failing to appeal denial of his speedy-trial dismissal motion.
- The circuit court dismissed the 2012 PCR as successive and time-barred under the UPCCRA; McComb appealed.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding McComb’s claims waived by his valid guilty plea and that the 2012 petition was filed well beyond the three-year statutory window.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the second PCR is barred as a successive writ | McComb contends new counsel errors justify relitigation | State asserts claims repeat issues already litigated and are procedurally barred | Dismissed as successive; McComb failed to show an exception |
| Whether the second PCR is time-barred under § 99-39-5(2) | McComb argues counsel errors justify late filing | State argues PCR filed 8 years after judgment, outside 3-year limit | Dismissed as time-barred; no shown exception |
| Whether counsel’s failure to appeal speedy-trial ruling survives guilty plea | McComb contends appellate omission rendered plea involuntary/ineffective | State contends guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional defects including speedy-trial claims | Waived by guilty plea; not cognizable in PCR |
| Whether pretrial/bond and plea-advice claims amount to fundamental constitutional errors | McComb asserts bond motion omission and advice about fines impacted rights | State asserts such pretrial/plea-related matters are waived by guilty plea or procedurally barred | Court held these claims waived or moot and not excepted from procedural bars |
Key Cases Cited
- McComb v. State, 986 So.2d 1087 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (affirming denial of McComb's first PCR motion)
- Anderson v. State, 577 So.2d 390 (Miss. 1991) (valid guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional rights, including speedy-trial claims)
- Williams v. State, 110 So.3d 840 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (movant bears burden to show exceptions to UPCCRA procedural bars)
- Ratcliff v. State, 120 So.3d 1058 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (post-judgment motions asserting same issues are successive writs)
- Jefferson v. State, 855 So.2d 1012 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003) (guilty plea waives evidentiary issues)