Willie Wash v. State of Mississippi
218 So. 3d 764
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Willie Wash was indicted (Nov. 2013) for third-offense felony shoplifting; charged as a habitual offender but the State agreed to reduce enhancement to allow a prison term rather than life.
- On May 1, 2014, Wash pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years in MDOC and a $1,000 fine.
- Wash filed a post-conviction relief (PCR) motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, defects in the indictment (including a duplicated prior), lack of a preliminary hearing, involuntary plea, vindictive prosecution, and that the State promised parole eligibility at 50% service.
- The circuit court denied the PCR on June 5, 2015; Wash filed for and received an out-of-time appeal.
- The appellate court reviewed the PCR denial under Strickland standards for ineffective assistance and affirmed, finding Wash failed to show deficient counsel performance or prejudice and that his claims were unsupported by the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance — failure to investigate | Wash says counsel failed to investigate and identify defenses (mentions a Shelby County warrant) | Record shows no particulars; defendant says Wash did not state what investigation would reveal or how outcome would change | Denied — Wash failed to specify what evidence investigation would have produced or how it would have altered his decision to plead guilty (Strickland/Madden standard) |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to challenge prior convictions on indictment | Wash argues counsel should have objected to two Tennessee violent priors (one allegedly duplicated) | Counsel notes Wash admitted priors during plea colloquy; guilty plea waives indictment defects | Denied — plea waived challenge to defective indictment; priors admitted in colloquy |
| Involuntariness/coercion of plea; counsel intimidation | Wash claims counsel used scare tactics and he was forced into plea | Plea transcript and plea agreement show Wash was satisfied with counsel, not coerced, and counsel had time to prepare | Denied — allegations contradicted by record and unproven by more than Wash’s assertions |
| Breach of plea promise (parole eligibility) | Wash contends State promised parole eligibility after serving 50% | Record/plea agreement did not support an enforceable promise of parole eligibility | Denied — no supporting record evidence that plea terms included guaranteed parole eligibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong deficiency-and-prejudice test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- McCollum v. State, 81 So. 3d 1191 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (applying Strickland in guilty-plea context; defendant must show counsel’s errors proximately caused the plea)
- Doss v. State, 19 So. 3d 690 (Miss. 2009) (standard of review for PCR denials: factual findings will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous)
- Cole v. State, 918 So. 2d 890 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (ineffective-assistance claims require specific factual allegations of unprofessional errors)
- Phillips v. State, 25 So. 3d 404 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (guilty plea waives claims of defective indictment)