Timothy T. Hobson v. State of Mississippi, 230 So. 3d 1096

Timothy Hobson pleaded guilty in Jan 2009 to possession of cocaine as a repeat offender and received a 16-year sentence: 4 years to serve, 5 years supervised post-release supervision (PR/S), and 7 years unsupervised PR/S.
Hobson stopped reporting to his probation officer in April 2013 and failed to pay fees; a revocation petition and arrest warrant issued in June 2013.
The 2013 warrant/revocation petition was dismissed in Sept 2015 for statutory timing defects; a new revocation petition and warrant were filed the same day asserting the same failures to report and pay.
At a Sept 28, 2015 revocation hearing the circuit court found Hobson violated PR/S and reinstated the suspended sentence, ordering him to serve the full 12 years of post-release time.
Hobson filed a pro se post-conviction relief (PCR) motion in Jan 2016 claiming (1) his failure to report was only a "technical violation" under House Bill 585 (effective July 1, 2014) requiring up to 90 days in a technical-violation center for a first violation, and (2) his post-release supervision illegally exceeded five years. The circuit court dismissed the PCR as time-barred and without merit.

Issue	Hobson's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Timeliness of PCR	PCR timely or exception applies due to changes in law affecting his revocation	PCR filed ~7 years after plea and is barred by UPCCRA 3-year limit	PCR is time-barred; no applicable statutory exception proven
Classification of failure-to-report as a technical violation	Failure to report is a technical violation under HB 585 and should trigger §47-7-37(5)(a) (≤90 days in technical-violation center)	Reinstatement of suspended sentence was proper; procedures for recommitment allow revocation and full sentence	Reinstatement was proper here because §47-7-37.1 (effective Apr 20, 2015) permits invoking probation and imposing full sentence when probationer absconds ≥6 months; Hobson absconded >6 months
Length of post-release supervision	Hobson contends his PR/S illegally exceeded five years	State: supervised vs unsupervised distinction permits more than five years total	Sentence lawful: five years supervised plus seven years unsupervised is valid under precedent; total PR/S may exceed five years when unsupervised

Davis v. State, 141 So. 3d 948 (Miss. Ct. App.) (standard of review for PCR dismissal)
Hicks v. State, 185 So. 3d 426 (Miss. Ct. App.) (distinguishing supervised vs unsupervised post-release supervision; total PR/S can exceed five years)
Johnson v. State, 925 So. 2d 86 (Miss.) (explaining unsupervised PR/S and court monitoring)