IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2002-CP-00325-SCT
JAMES CLAUDY FELDER
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/04/2002 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MIKE SMITH COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: PIKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: PRO SE ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: DEWITT (DEE) BATES, JR. NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED IN PART - 07/01/2004 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED:
EN BANC.
COBB, PRESIDING JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:
¶1. In this appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief by the Pike County Circuit Court, we
consider whether the trial court erred in denying James Claudy Felder's claims that his guilty plea was
involuntary and his sentence excessive and unconstitutional. We affirm the trial court's decision as to
Felder's guilty plea and claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as well as the upholding of Felder's
sentence of twenty years and a $10,000 fine. We also affirm the trial court’s ordering Felder to pay an assessment to the Mississippi Crime Victims' Fund; however, we remand for clarification of the amount to
be paid.
FACTS
¶2. James Claudy Felder was indicted for felony murder by a Pike County Grand Jury, and he
subsequently entered a plea of guilty to manslaughter. At sentencing, the circuit court imposed upon Felder
a term of 20 years in prison, payment of a $10,000 fine and an assessment of $10,000 into the Mississippi
Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund, which would include reimbursing the Crime Victim Compensation
Fund for “$2,891 of funeral expenses for the victim.” The trial court order, however, sets out that Felder
was ordered to pay only $1,000 to the Mississippi Crime Victims' Compensation Fund. Subsequently,
Felder filed a motion for post-conviction collateral relief asserting that his plea was involuntary, that he was
denied effective assistance of counsel and that his sentence was excessive. The circuit court denied the
claims noting that Felder was specifically advised of the maximum sentence that could be imposed and that
he expressed complete satisfaction with his attorney.
¶3. Felder now appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion asserting the same claims here as he
did in the trial court. In this appeal, we consider whether the circuit court erred in denying Felder's motion
for post-conviction relief. We affirm on all issues except the amount to be paid into the Mississippi Crime
Victims’ Compensation Fund, and remand for the limited purpose of clarification of the amount to be paid.
ANALYSIS
¶4. When reviewing a trial court's decision to deny a petition for post-conviction relief, this Court will
not disturb the trial court's factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous. Brown v. State,
2 731 So.2d 595, 598 (Miss. 1999). However, where questions of law are raised the applicable standard
of review is de novo. Id. at 598.
¶5. First, Felder asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief because
his guilty plea was involuntary and his attorney was ineffective. Felder argues that he pled guilty only after
his attorney assured him that he would not get the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. Based on our
review of the transcript of the plea colloquy, and the trial court’s order, it is clear that the trial court judge
thoroughly examined Felder and correctly found that Felder understood the consequences of his guilty plea
and understood the maximum penalty could be imposed. It is also clear that the trial court observed that
Felder was competent to understand and did understand the consequences of his guilty plea and that the
plea was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made. Furthermore, the trial court found that Felder had
been represented by counsel at each stage of the proceedings and that he expressed satisfaction with his
attorney's representation. Because we find no error in the trial court's denial of Felder's post-conviction
relief claim, we will not disturb that part of the order.
¶6. Felder’s final argument is that his sentence is unconstitutional and/or violates Mississippi law. The
record reveals that the circuit court sentenced Felder to twenty (20) years imprisonment. The court also
ordered Felder to pay $10,000 to the Mississippi Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund and a $10,000 fine.
Felder argues that the trial court lacked authority to sentence him to 20 years and to impose a $10,000 fine
and a $10,000 assessment to the Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund. As will be explained below, we
disagree with Felder’s classification of the amount to be paid into the Mississippi Crime Victims’
Compensation Fund as “restitution.”
3 ¶7. So long as the sentence imposed is within the statutory limits, sentencing is generally a matter of trial
court discretion. Green v. State, 631 So.2d 167, 176 (Miss. 1994); Wallace v. State, 607 So.2d
1184, 1188 (Miss. 1992). The Court must first decide whether Felder's sentence is within the statutory
limits imposed upon conviction for manslaughter, by Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-25 (Rev. 2000), which
reads:
Any person convicted of manslaughter shall be fined in a sum not less than five hundred dollars, or imprisoned in the county jail not more than one year, or both, or in the penitentiary not less than two years, nor more than twenty years.
Thus under that general manslaughter penalty statute, Felder could have been fined OR he could have been
sentenced to twenty years in the penitentiary, but not both. However, to answer the question of whether
Felder's sentence is lawful, there is another statute that we must also consider. In 1985, the Legislature
enacted Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-32(1) which provides:
Offenses punishable by imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for more than one (1) year and for which no fine is provided elsewhere by statute may be punishable by a fine not in excess of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00). Such fine, if imposed, may be in addition to imprisonment or any other punishment or penalty authorized by law.
¶8. Based on the application of these two statutes, we hold that where the sentence imposed is of a
term of imprisonment in the penitentiary, the fine provision of § 97-3-25 is not applicable, and because it
is not applicable, § 97-3-25 effectively has no provision for a fine in such a circumstance. Where, as here,
the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for more than one year and the imposition of
a fine is not provided elsewhere, § 99-19-32(1) is applicable to impose a fine not in excess of $10,000.
Because Felder's sentence is within the statutory limits, and we find no indication that the trial court abused
its discretion, we find no error in the imposition of the twenty-year sentence and the $10,000 fine.
4 ¶9. On the issue of the trial court’s assessing Felder the sum of $10,000 to be paid into the Mississippi
Crime Victims' Fund, we find it necessary to examine yet another statute. Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-49
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2002-CP-00325-SCT
JAMES CLAUDY FELDER
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/04/2002 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MIKE SMITH COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: PIKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: PRO SE ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: DEWITT (DEE) BATES, JR. NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED IN PART - 07/01/2004 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED:
EN BANC.
COBB, PRESIDING JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:
¶1. In this appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief by the Pike County Circuit Court, we
consider whether the trial court erred in denying James Claudy Felder's claims that his guilty plea was
involuntary and his sentence excessive and unconstitutional. We affirm the trial court's decision as to
Felder's guilty plea and claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as well as the upholding of Felder's
sentence of twenty years and a $10,000 fine. We also affirm the trial court’s ordering Felder to pay an assessment to the Mississippi Crime Victims' Fund; however, we remand for clarification of the amount to
be paid.
FACTS
¶2. James Claudy Felder was indicted for felony murder by a Pike County Grand Jury, and he
subsequently entered a plea of guilty to manslaughter. At sentencing, the circuit court imposed upon Felder
a term of 20 years in prison, payment of a $10,000 fine and an assessment of $10,000 into the Mississippi
Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund, which would include reimbursing the Crime Victim Compensation
Fund for “$2,891 of funeral expenses for the victim.” The trial court order, however, sets out that Felder
was ordered to pay only $1,000 to the Mississippi Crime Victims' Compensation Fund. Subsequently,
Felder filed a motion for post-conviction collateral relief asserting that his plea was involuntary, that he was
denied effective assistance of counsel and that his sentence was excessive. The circuit court denied the
claims noting that Felder was specifically advised of the maximum sentence that could be imposed and that
he expressed complete satisfaction with his attorney.
¶3. Felder now appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion asserting the same claims here as he
did in the trial court. In this appeal, we consider whether the circuit court erred in denying Felder's motion
for post-conviction relief. We affirm on all issues except the amount to be paid into the Mississippi Crime
Victims’ Compensation Fund, and remand for the limited purpose of clarification of the amount to be paid.
ANALYSIS
¶4. When reviewing a trial court's decision to deny a petition for post-conviction relief, this Court will
not disturb the trial court's factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous. Brown v. State,
2 731 So.2d 595, 598 (Miss. 1999). However, where questions of law are raised the applicable standard
of review is de novo. Id. at 598.
¶5. First, Felder asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief because
his guilty plea was involuntary and his attorney was ineffective. Felder argues that he pled guilty only after
his attorney assured him that he would not get the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. Based on our
review of the transcript of the plea colloquy, and the trial court’s order, it is clear that the trial court judge
thoroughly examined Felder and correctly found that Felder understood the consequences of his guilty plea
and understood the maximum penalty could be imposed. It is also clear that the trial court observed that
Felder was competent to understand and did understand the consequences of his guilty plea and that the
plea was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made. Furthermore, the trial court found that Felder had
been represented by counsel at each stage of the proceedings and that he expressed satisfaction with his
attorney's representation. Because we find no error in the trial court's denial of Felder's post-conviction
relief claim, we will not disturb that part of the order.
¶6. Felder’s final argument is that his sentence is unconstitutional and/or violates Mississippi law. The
record reveals that the circuit court sentenced Felder to twenty (20) years imprisonment. The court also
ordered Felder to pay $10,000 to the Mississippi Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund and a $10,000 fine.
Felder argues that the trial court lacked authority to sentence him to 20 years and to impose a $10,000 fine
and a $10,000 assessment to the Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund. As will be explained below, we
disagree with Felder’s classification of the amount to be paid into the Mississippi Crime Victims’
Compensation Fund as “restitution.”
3 ¶7. So long as the sentence imposed is within the statutory limits, sentencing is generally a matter of trial
court discretion. Green v. State, 631 So.2d 167, 176 (Miss. 1994); Wallace v. State, 607 So.2d
1184, 1188 (Miss. 1992). The Court must first decide whether Felder's sentence is within the statutory
limits imposed upon conviction for manslaughter, by Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-25 (Rev. 2000), which
reads:
Any person convicted of manslaughter shall be fined in a sum not less than five hundred dollars, or imprisoned in the county jail not more than one year, or both, or in the penitentiary not less than two years, nor more than twenty years.
Thus under that general manslaughter penalty statute, Felder could have been fined OR he could have been
sentenced to twenty years in the penitentiary, but not both. However, to answer the question of whether
Felder's sentence is lawful, there is another statute that we must also consider. In 1985, the Legislature
enacted Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-32(1) which provides:
Offenses punishable by imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for more than one (1) year and for which no fine is provided elsewhere by statute may be punishable by a fine not in excess of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00). Such fine, if imposed, may be in addition to imprisonment or any other punishment or penalty authorized by law.
¶8. Based on the application of these two statutes, we hold that where the sentence imposed is of a
term of imprisonment in the penitentiary, the fine provision of § 97-3-25 is not applicable, and because it
is not applicable, § 97-3-25 effectively has no provision for a fine in such a circumstance. Where, as here,
the offense is punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary for more than one year and the imposition of
a fine is not provided elsewhere, § 99-19-32(1) is applicable to impose a fine not in excess of $10,000.
Because Felder's sentence is within the statutory limits, and we find no indication that the trial court abused
its discretion, we find no error in the imposition of the twenty-year sentence and the $10,000 fine.
4 ¶9. On the issue of the trial court’s assessing Felder the sum of $10,000 to be paid into the Mississippi
Crime Victims' Fund, we find it necessary to examine yet another statute. Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-49
states, in pertinent part:
When a person is convicted of a felony in this state, in addition to any other sentence it may impose, the court may, in its discretion, order the offender to pay a state assessment not to exceed the greater of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or the maximum fine that may be imposed for the offense, into the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund created pursuant to Section 99-41-29.
In viewing the above-cited statutes in pari materia, the trial court was within its discretion to order Felder
to pay a $10,000 assessment to the Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund. However, because there is a
discrepancy between the amount reflected in the transcript and the subsequent sentencing order, this matter
is remanded for the limited purpose of clarification of the amount to be paid to the fund.
CONCLUSION
¶10. We find no error in the trial court's denial of Felder's motion for post-conviction relief as to the
claims of an involuntary guilty plea and ineffective assistance of counsel. We further find no error in the trial
court’s imposition of a term of twenty years in prison, a $10,000 fine, and a $10,000 assessment to the
Mississippi Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund; however, we remand this matter for the limited purpose
of clarifying the amount that Felder is to pay to the Mississippi Crime Victims' Fund.
¶11. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED IN PART.
SMITH, C.J., WALLER, P.J., EASLEY, GRAVES, CARLSON, DICKINSON AND RANDOLPH, JJ., CONCUR. DIAZ, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.