192 So. 3d 1147
Miss. Ct. App.2016Background
- Nedra Pittman pleaded guilty on Sept. 26, 2006 to one count of embezzlement and one count of uttering a forgery; each conviction carried a ten-year sentence with two years in the ISP and the remaining eight years suspended, to run concurrently.
- The sentencing order shows Pittman was informed of the minimum/maximum exposure, acknowledged her plea was voluntary, and that the court questioned her about counsel’s performance.
- The State had recommended ten years suspended with five years supervised probation, but the court imposed ISP and suspension differently; the record indicates Pittman knew the court could reject the State’s recommendation.
- Pittman completed ISP but later violated probation and served 2 years 10 months after revocation.
- On Feb. 3, 2015 Pittman filed a postconviction relief (PCR) motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to advise her about house arrest and that the court could reject the State’s sentence recommendation; the trial court denied relief as time-barred and on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective in advising Pittman before her guilty plea | Pittman says counsel failed to inform her she could receive house arrest and failed to advise that the court might reject the State’s recommended sentence | State argues Pittman’s claim is time-barred and the record shows she knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty and received effective assistance | Court affirmed denial of PCR: claim time-barred and, on the merits, Pittman failed to show deficient performance or prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Burrough v. State, 9 So. 3d 368 (Miss. 2009) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance in guilty-plea context)
- Vielee v. State, 653 So. 2d 920 (Miss. 1995) (affidavit-only ineffective-assistance claims generally insufficient in collateral relief)
- Watts v. State, 97 So. 3d 722 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (reiterating affidavit-only insufficiency)
- Smothers v. State, 176 So. 3d 145 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015) (ineffective-assistance and involuntary-plea claims not exempt from PCR time-bar)
- Salter v. State, 64 So. 3d 514 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (same)
- Hughes v. State, 106 So. 3d 836 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (standard of review for PCR denial)