Pierce v. State, 115 So. 3d 869

Pierce was indicted for armed robbery on Feb 3, 2009, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to 17 years; judgment entered Mar 2, 2009.
Pierce filed a first PCR on Aug 10, 2010 alleging involuntary plea and IAC; it was dismissed Aug 19, 2010 and not appealed.
Pierce filed a second PCR on Jan 30, 2012 alleging the same grounds; circuit court dismissed Feb 3, 2012 as barred by being a successive writ.
The circuit court found Pierce had previously been denied relief in 2010 (cause 10-0217-CV-L) and that the 2012 motion sought relief on the same grounds.
The court noted that under Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-23(6), a final order dismissing a motion bars a second or successive motion unless an exception applies; Pierce did not allege any exception.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the second PCR is barred as a successive writ under §99-39-23(6).	Pierce argues exceptions to the bar apply.	State contends no exception applies; second motion is barred.	Second PCR barred as successive writ; no applicable exception.

Grogan v. State, 89 So.3d 617 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (clear error standard; de novo review of legal conclusions)
Beal v. State, 58 So.3d 709 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (standard for post-conviction review; deference to findings)
Hoyt v. State, 952 So.2d 1016 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (voluntariness of guilty plea requires informed understanding of rights)
Alexander v. State, 605 So.2d 1170 (Miss. 1992) (necessity of informing defendant of plea consequences and rights)
Wilson v. State, 577 So.2d 394 (Miss. 1991) (waiver of trial rights and consequences of plea)
Smith v. State, 935 So.2d 412 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (right to testify or not testifying relates to self-incrimination waiver)
Fair v. State, 102 So.3d 1165 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (presumption of effective assistance; totality of circumstances; Strickland standard)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel (deficient performance and prejudice))