TERRELL U. WILLIAMS A/K/A TERRELL UNDRA WILLIAMS, APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, APPELLEE
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/28/2013. TRIAL JUDGE: HON. TOMIE T. GREEN. TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED.
FOR APPELLANT: TERRELL U. WILLIAMS (Pro se).
FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: LISA L. BLOUNT.
BEFORE LEE, C.J., BARNES AND FAIR, JJ. LEE, C.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, P.JJ., ISHEE, ROBERTS, CARLTON, MAXWELL, FAIR AND JAMES, JJ., CONCUR.
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
¶1. Terrell Williams, appearing pro se, appeals the Hinds County Circuit Court's denial of his motion for post-conviction relief (PCR). Finding no error, we affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2. In August 2010, a Hinds County grand jury indicted Williams for the statutory rape of his fifteen-year-old stepdaughter, E.G., in violation of Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-3-65(1)(a) (Rev. 2006). Williams entered a plea of guilty, admitting that between August 1, 2009, and August 1, 2010, he " had sexual intercourse with E.G." During the plea hearing, Williams admitted to having sex with and impregnating E.G. in Hinds County, Mississippi. The circuit court sentenced him to thirty years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), with twenty years suspended, ten years to serve, and five years of post-release supervision. Williams was also ordered to register as a sex offender and to have no contact with the victim, her family, or any child under sixteen without adult supervision.
¶3. In April 2012, Williams filed a PCR motion challenging the circuit court's jurisdiction, and alleging the existence of evidence not previously presented that would require vacation of his conviction and sentence. In May 2012, Williams filed a motion to amend his PCR motion with an additional argument challenging the sufficiency of his indictment. In June 2012, Williams filed a motion to recuse the circuit court judge, questioning her impartiality, which was never ruled upon. The circuit court, finding Williams's PCR claims without merit, denied his PCR motion. Williams now appeals that decision, arguing: (1) the circuit court erred in denying his motion to quash his indictment; (2) the circuit court did not have jurisdiction over his criminal charge; and (3) the circuit court erred in dismissing his PCR motion without an evidentiary hearing.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶4. In reviewing the denial of a PCR motion, the appellate court " will not disturb the trial court's factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous." Presley v. State, 48 So.3d 526, 528-29 (¶ 10) (Miss. 2010) (quoting Brown v. State, 731 So.2d 595, 598 (¶ 6) (Miss. 1999)). ...