COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/13/2013. TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JEFF WEILL SR. TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: MOTION FOR POST- CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED.
FOR APPELLANT: ANTONIO WILLIAMS (Pro se).
FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BY: STEPHANIE BRELAND WOOD.
BEFORE LEE, C.J., CARLTON AND MAXWELL, JJ. LEE, C.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, P.JJ., BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS, CARLTON, FAIR AND JAMES, JJ., CONCUR.
¶1. This is Antonio Williams's third appellate challenge to his 1987 murder conviction. He argues his counsel was ineffective, his plea was involuntary, his speedy-trial right was violated, and his prior qualifying convictions for habitual-offender status were illegal. Just as the trial judge's review of Williams's claims was impeded, so is ours. After review, we find we lack jurisdiction over his time-barred and successive-writ barred motion for post-conviction relief (PCR). We thus dismiss.
Facts, Procedural History, and Discussion
¶2. On July 27, 1982, Williams was convicted of two counts of burglary. He was sentenced to three years' imprisonment on Count I and five years' imprisonment on Count II. On December 8, 1987, Williams was convicted of murder. Because Williams was a habitual offender, the circuit court sentenced him to life imprisonment without eligibility for probation or parole.
¶3. In 1990, our supreme court affirmed Williams's direct appeal of his murder conviction and sentence. Williams v. State, 566 So.2d 469, 472 (Miss. 1990). And on November 6, 2003, the supreme court denied Williams's first application for leave to proceed with a PCR motion. See Williams v. State, 65 So.3d 319, 325 (¶ 22) (Miss.Ct.App. 2011) (Roberts, J., dissenting).
¶4. Williams then filed a second application for leave to file a PCR motion in 2006, which our supreme court also denied by order dated November 15, 2006. Id. Yet still lacking permission to seek PCR relief, in April 2009, Williams filed a PCR motion, which the circuit court dismissed. We affirmed the dismissal of Williams's PCR motion. Williams, 65 So.3d at 324 (¶ 18). Even though nothing in the record showed Williams obtained permission to file a PCR motion, we addressed the merits
of his PCR appeal because neither party raised jurisdiction. Id. at 323 (¶ 17). We found Williams's trial counsel was not ineffective by not objecting when the trial judge considered documents identifying his two prior burglary convictions. Id. at 322 (¶ 10). And we noted Williams's challenge to the voluntariness of his 1982 guilty pleas was time-barred. Id. at (¶ 12).
¶5. On May 24, 2012, Williams filed a motion to vacate the judgment and sentence with the circuit court. The circuit judge treated the filing as a PCR motion. The judge found Williams's claims were ...