Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

DAVID BRYAN CAMPBELL v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

MAY 04, 1983

DAVID BRYAN CAMPBELL
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI



BEFORE BROOM, HAWKINS AND DAN LEE

HAWKINS, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

David Bryan Campbell appeals from an order of the Circuit Court of Lamar County denying relief sought in a petition to clarify sentence. FACTS

Campbell was indicted January 28, 1981 by the Grand Jury of Lamar County for the crime of lustful touching of a female child under the age of fourteen, in violation of Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-5-23 (Supp. 1981). On February 9, at the same court term, he entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced to serve a term of five years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with four years suspended. Campbell also received

 a five-year probationary period beginning that date. The pertinent portion of the court's order states:

 THEREFORE, for said offense and on said plea of guilty it is by the Court ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the said defendant be, and he is hereby sentenced to a term of five (5) years in the Mississippi Department of Corrections. . . .

 Provided, however, . . . that the ends of justice and the best interest of the public and defendant will be best served, the Court hereby suspends the execution of four (4) years of the above sentence for a period of five years, the suspension of this sentence to commence after the defendant has served one (1) year in the Mississippi Department of Corrections.

 On November 30, 1981, Campbell's parole supervisor made an affidavit that Campbell had violated his probation on October 31, 1981. A warrant was issued for his arrest, and on December 11, 1981, a waiver of hearing executed by Campbell was filed, this waiver stating: I . . . do hereby waive my right to a Probation Revocation Hearing and by the presents do hereby authorize the Court to enter an order revoking my probation and any other appropriate order consistent therewith. . . . *fn1

 On December 11, the circuit judge entered an order of revocation, which, after reciting Campbell's sentence and his placement on probation for a period of five years, and his violation thereof, concluded with the following adjudication:

 IT, THEREFORE, IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the probation of the aforesaid defendant ought to be revoked and it is hereby revoked in accordance with Section 27, Chapter 262, Laws of Mississippi, 1956, and the said defendant is hereby remanded into the custody of the Sheriff to await transportation to the State Penitentiary. The commitment sheet mailed by the circuit clerk to the penitentiary, and dated December 11, recited the sentence and enclosed a copy of the order of conviction and order of revocation.

 On December 31, 1981, the circuit clerk prepared an amended commitment sheet and sent it to the penitentiary. Following the heading, TERM OF SENTENCE, the December 11 commitment

 sheet stated: "5 years," but the December 31 commitment sheet stated: "5 years (1 YEAR SERVED, BALANCE OF 4 YEARS AS A NEW SENTENCE)" .

 Then, under REMARKS, the December 31 commitment sheet added: "NOTE: JUDGE PRICHARD'S INTENT IS FOR THE REMAINING 4 YEARS TO BEGIN AS A NEW SENTENCE AFTER REVOCATION, GIVING CREDIT ONLY FOR TIME IN JAIL AWAITING REVOCATION HEARING" .

 On May 25, 1982, Campbell filed in the Circuit Court of Lamar County a petition to clarify his sentence. The petition alleged, inter alia, that upon being returned to the penitentiary he had been given a new prison number, and the Department of Corrections records indicated he was then serving a new and different term of confinement other than the original five years. Campbell alleged that this was incorrect. He then recited how he was being prejudiced, using the following example:

 This mistake hinders petitioner in that he is not being given credit for the time he has already served or any good time he may have earned towards his parole date. EXAMPLE: On a five year sentence an inmate, as of this date, is required to serve one third of his sentence before being considered for parole. On a five (5) year term that would be approximately twenty (20) months. Petitioner has already served over seventeen (17) months on the required twenty (20) months, thus enabling petitioner to parole eligibility in three (3) months. On the other hand on a four year sentence an inmate would need to serve approximately sixteen (16) months before becoming eligible for parole. The way the sentence for petitioner now stands petitioner has only served six (6) months on ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.