Boothe v. State

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

Boothe v. State

755 So. 2d 25, 1999 Miss. App. LEXIS 377, 1999 WL 410556

Court of Appeals of Mississippi·Decided June 22, 1999·No. No. 98-CP-00650-COA·Published

Opinion

KING, P.J.,

for the Court:

¶ 1. On June 8, 1992, Willie Boothe pled guilty to the sale of cocaine. Approximately six years later, on March 24, 1998, he filed a motion for post-conviction relief. On April 7, 1998, the Panola County Circuit Court dismissed the motion. On April 14, 1998, Boothe appealed the circuit court dismissal to this Court.

[26] ¶ 2. Mississippi Code Annotated § 99-39-5(2)(Supp.l998) mandates that motions for post-conviction relief be filed within three years from the‘entry of a guilty plea. While there are stated exceptions to the statute of limitations, this Court does not find that Boothe satisfies an exception. In accordance with Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2), this Court finds that Boothe’s motion was not filed within the statutory time requirement, and therefore was time barred. Accordingly, this Court affirms the circuit court judgment and dismisses this appeal.

¶ 3. THE JUDGMENT OF THE PA-NOLA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT DISMISSING POST CONVICTION RELIEF IS AFFIRMED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO PANOLA COUNTY.

McMILLIN, C.J., SOUTHWICK, P.J., COLEMAN, DIAZ, IRVING, LEE, PAYNE, AND THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR. BRIDGES, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

KING, P.J.,

for the Court:

¶ 1. On June 8, 1992, Willie Boothe pled guilty to the sale of cocaine. Approximately six years later, on March 24, 1998, he filed a motion for post-conviction relief. On April 7, 1998, the Panola County Circuit Court dismissed the motion. On April 14, 1998, Boothe appealed the circuit court dismissal to this Court.

[26] ¶ 2. Mississippi Code Annotated § 99-39-5(2)(Supp.l998) mandates that motions for post-conviction relief be filed within three years from the‘entry of a guilty plea. While there are stated exceptions to the statute of limitations, this Court does not find that Boothe satisfies an exception. In accordance with Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2), this Court finds that Boothe’s motion was not filed within the statutory time requirement, and therefore was time barred. Accordingly, this Court affirms the circuit court judgment and dismisses this appeal.

¶ 3. THE JUDGMENT OF THE PA-NOLA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT DISMISSING POST CONVICTION RELIEF IS AFFIRMED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO PANOLA COUNTY.

McMILLIN, C.J., SOUTHWICK, P.J., COLEMAN, DIAZ, IRVING, LEE, PAYNE, AND THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR. BRIDGES, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.

Boothe v. State, 755 So. 2d 25, 1999 Miss. App. LEXIS 377, 1999 WL 410556 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

755 So. 2d 25 (Boothe v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related