O'Cain v. State
120 So. 3d 482
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- O’Cain was indicted for armed robbery (2007), pled guilty, and received a 15-year MDOC sentence.
- He filed a PCR in 2008 claiming counsel misadvised him about parole eligibility (told 10 years vs. actual 15); court granted relief, vacated conviction, and set aside sentence.
- In 2009 O’Cain pled guilty to strong-armed robbery and again received 15 years.
- In 2011 O’Cain filed a letter seeking credit/clarification for ~1 year, 2 months, 5 days he served on the original armed-robbery conviction; the court treated it as a PCR motion and denied relief.
- In 2012 O’Cain filed another motion seeking earned-time allowance for that pre-plea custody; the circuit court dismissed it as a successive writ and on the merits (ineligibility under the earned-time statute).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2012 filing is procedurally barred as a successive PCR | O’Cain sought earned-time credit for pre-plea custody; reasserted prior claim | State argued the 2011 letter was a PCR and the 2012 filing was successive and barred | Court: motion is a successive writ and procedurally barred under § 99-39-23(6) |
| Whether O’Cain is entitled to earned-time/trustee credit for time served awaiting rearraignment | O’Cain argued he deserved credit for the ~1 year+ he served on the armed-robbery charge | State argued armed-robbery required mandatory time for parole eligibility, making him ineligible for earned-time/trustee status for that period | Court: substantive claim fails—under § 47-5-139(1)(e) he lacked required mandatory time and was ineligible for earned-time |
| Whether summary dismissal of the PCR was proper | O’Cain contends relief warranted | State asserts dismissal proper because movant cannot show entitlement to relief from face of record | Court: summary dismissal appropriate; movant can prove no facts entitling him to relief |
| Whether prior proceedings gave O’Cain proper credit for time served | O’Cain contends he was not given credit | State asserts record shows proper credit was given | Court: record reflects proper credit for time served; no relief due |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 872 So.2d 711 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (standard for reviewing dismissal of PCR)
- Pace v. State, 770 So.2d 1052 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (de novo review for questions of law in PCR appeals)
- Anderson v. State, 89 So.3d 645 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (summary dismissal of PCR when movant plainly not entitled to relief)
- State v. Santiago, 773 So.2d 921 (Miss. 2000) (dismissal proper when plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling relief)