228 So. 3d 946
Miss. Ct. App.2017Background
- Nicholas Mays pled guilty in 2012 to sale of a controlled substance (count I) in Rankin County; count II was nol prossed. He was sentenced as a subsequent drug offender to 60 years (50 years to serve + 5 years post-release supervision).
- Mays filed a first PCR in Feb 2013 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel; that petition was dismissed and appeals were unsuccessful.
- In Sept 2015 Mays filed a second PCR reasserting ineffective assistance and asserting the circuit court lacked jurisdiction because the offense occurred in Scott County, not Rankin.
- Mays submitted conflicting affidavits from Vanessa White and Laneshia Hughes about where the drug transaction/stop occurred; one earlier affidavit (in the first PCR) placed the event in Rankin County, later affidavits asserted Scott County.
- The circuit court dismissed the second PCR as a successive writ under Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-23(6); the court of appeals affirmed, finding no newly discovered evidence or colorable fundamental-rights violation and no merit to the ineffective-assistance claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the second PCR is barred as a successive writ/newly discovered evidence exception applies | Mays: affidavits showing crime occurred in Scott County are newly discovered and defeat Rankin jurisdiction | State: affiants were known earlier and one earlier affidavit placed the event in Rankin; evidence was discoverable earlier so exception doesn't apply | Dismissal affirmed; not newly discovered evidence, successive-writ bar applies |
| Whether the circuit court lacked jurisdiction because offense occurred in Scott County | Mays: crime actually occurred in Scott County, so Rankin court lacked jurisdiction | State: Mays pled guilty to committing sale in Rankin County; conflicting affidavits do not overcome plea/jurisdiction | Court rejected claim; plea and prior record support Rankin jurisdiction |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate location, invalidating plea | Mays: counsel failed to investigate location; would not have pled but for poor representation | State: Mays pleaded guilty, affirmed satisfaction with counsel at plea hearing; bare assertions insufficient under Strickland | Claim failed; Mays did not show deficient performance or prejudice required by Strickland |
| Whether any asserted claim rises to a fundamental constitutional violation to overcome procedural bar | Mays: asserts constitutional violation (ineffective assistance) | State: mere assertion is insufficient; must show a basis suggesting truth of fundamental-rights violation | Court: no colorable showing of fundamental constitutional error; exception not triggered |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-pronged test for ineffective assistance: performance and prejudice)
- Stringer v. State, 454 So. 2d 468 (Miss. 1984) (Mississippi adoption of Strickland standard)
- Chapman v. State, 167 So. 3d 1170 (Miss. 2015) (standard of review for PCR dismissals)
- Rowland v. State, 42 So. 3d 503 (Miss. 2010) (errors affecting fundamental rights may be excepted from procedural bars)
- Stovall v. State, 873 So. 2d 1056 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (requirement that claim appear to have some basis to overcome procedural bar)
- Cole v. State, 918 So. 2d 890 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (prejudice showing required to vacate plea on ineffective-assistance grounds)