Neal v. State, 186 So. 3d 378

Alton Neal pleaded guilty (Nov. 22, 2011) to one count of aggravated domestic violence and received a 20-year sentence with 10 years suspended and five years supervised probation after 10 years served.
Neal filed a motion for postconviction relief (Dec. 23, 2013) asserting his plea was involuntary and he received ineffective assistance of counsel; the trial court denied relief and Neal appealed pro se.
At the plea colloquy Neal acknowledged understanding the charge, was informed of the possible sentence range (2–20 years and up to $10,000 fine), and admitted taking prescribed medications (morphine, Seroquel, Buspirone, Lortab, trazodone).
Neal later claimed the court failed to advise him properly about minimum/maximum sentences, failed to inquire about intoxication/competency, and his counsel failed to investigate and disclose his mental-health conditions.
The trial record contained Neal’s sworn statements confirming he read and understood the plea rights, was satisfied with counsel, and that his medications maintained his stability; Neal offered no affidavits or other evidence rebutting those statements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Voluntariness of plea — notice of min/max and waiver of rights	Neal: plea was involuntary because he was not properly advised of minimum/maximum and rights waived	State: plea colloquy shows court informed Neal of sentence range and rights; Neal affirmed understanding	Court: plea was voluntary; Neal’s sworn colloquy responses control and issue is without merit
Intoxication at plea	Neal: court did not question whether he was intoxicated at plea	State: court asked about current and at-time intoxication and Neal disclosed medications	Court: record shows inquiry and disclosures; claim is without merit
Competency to enter plea	Neal: court should have sua sponte held a competency hearing re: mental capacity	State: no reasonable grounds shown; court questioned Neal about meds and diagnoses and he said he was taking meds as prescribed	Court: no indication competency hearing was required; claim without merit
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Neal: counsel failed to investigate and disclose PTSD, panic attacks, bipolar disorder, which affected plea	State: medical conditions and medications were disclosed in colloquy; Neal said he was satisfied with counsel; no supporting evidence provided	Court: ineffective-assistance claim contradicted by record and unsupported by evidence; claim without merit

Byrne v. State, 30 So.3d 1264 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (standard for reversal of PCR denial)
Smith v. State, 806 So.2d 1148 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (review standard for PCR denials)
Brown v. State, 731 So.2d 595 (Miss. 1999) (de novo review for legal issues)
Alexander v. State, 605 So.2d 1170 (Miss. 1992) (plea must be voluntary and intelligent; advise defendant of charge and consequences)
Watson v. State, 100 So.3d 1034 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (burden to prove invalid plea and importance of plea colloquy)
Woods v. State, 71 So.3d 1241 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (thorough plea colloquy is significant evidence of voluntariness)
Montalto v. State, 119 So.3d 1087 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (distinguishes state of mind at crime from competence to plead)
Magee v. State, 914 So.2d 729 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (trial court must order evaluation if reasonable grounds to doubt competency)
Goff v. State, 14 So.3d 625 (Miss. 2009) (trial judge’s discretion in assessing reasonable grounds for competency evaluation)
Harden v. State, 59 So.3d 594 (Miss. 2011) (competency evaluation requirement under court rules)
Elliott v. State, 41 So.3d 701 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (court may disregard ineffective-assistance claims contradicted by record)
Deloach v. State, 937 So.2d 1010 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (ineffective assistance in guilty-plea context requires showing counsel’s errors caused the plea)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)