Robinson v. State, 2011 Miss. App. LEXIS 774

Robinson was convicted in March 2006 in Bolivar County Circuit Court of four counts of possession of controlled substances and sentenced as a habitual offender to various prison terms and fines.
Robinson’s stop occurred March 2, 2005 in Bolivar County for speeding; officer smelled raw marijuana and noted mismatched VINs and expired inspection sticker on the car.
Drug-sniffing dog alerted to drugs in the vehicle; trunk contained ecstasy, cocaine, marijuana, and alprazolam after a search.
Suppression motion challenging the trunk search was denied after a hearing; officers relied on probable cause and the automobile exclusion with odor and dog alerts.
Two days before trial, the State moved to amend the indictment to reflect habitual-offender status; the court granted the motion on the morning of trial, and the jury found Robinson guilty on all counts.
Robinson filed a post-conviction relief motion; the circuit court denied relief, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the indictment for MDMA possession is fatally defective	Robinson argues Count I is improperly charged due to MDMA wording	State contends indictment correctly tracked the applicable statute	Indictment valid; plain-error doctrine not invoked
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to sentencing as a habitual-offender	Robinson asserts improper sentencing due to failure to object	State asserts sentence compliance with statute and proportionality standards	Sentences and fines within statutory bounds; no ineffective assistance shown
Whether appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising sentencing proportionality on direct appeal	Appellant complained appellate counsel failed to challenge proportionality	State contends issues already addressed by proportionality framework and preservation	Appellate failure to raise proportionality not reversible; merit lacking
Whether appellate counsel's failure to challenge the search/evidence or to exhaust state remedies merits relief	Appellant asserts failure to challenge trunk-search admission and to exhaust state remedies for federal relief	State argues search was proper under automobile exception and that exhaustion issues are non-jurisdictional	Search upheld; exhaustion argument not meritorious; no ineffective assistance found

Copeland v. State, 423 So. 2d 1333 (Miss. 1982) (indictment specificity requires charging statute language)
Liddell v. State, 7 So. 3d 217 (Miss. 2009) (procedure for ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal)
Cowan v. Miss. Bureau of Narcotics, 2 So. 3d 759 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (smell as basis for probable cause to search vehicle)
Granberry v. Greer, 481 U.S. 129 (U.S. 1987) (state exhaustion principles for federal habeas review)
Jackson v. Johnson, 217 F.3d 360 (5th Cir. 2000) (no constitutional right to counsel for discretionary state appeals)
Gray v. State, 926 So. 2d 961 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (three-factor proportionality framework for sentences)
Willis v. State, 911 So. 2d 947 (Miss. 2005) (proportionality considerations for sentencing within statutory limits)
Presley v. State, 474 So. 2d 612 (Miss. 1985) (sentencing discretion within statutory bounds retaining valid standards)
Cite Nguyen v. State, 761 So.2d 873 (Miss. 2000) (indictment adequacy and appraisal when applying standard review)
Cite Cowan v. Miss. Bureau of Narcotics, 2 So.3d 759 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (smell-based probable cause for vehicle search)