JAMES HARRIS A/K/A JAMES M. HARRIS A/K/A JAMES MATHEW HARRIS, APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, APPELLEE
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/25/2013. TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WILLIAM E. CHAPMAN III. TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED.
JAMES HARRIS, APPELLANT, Pro se.
FOR APPELLEE: BILLY L. GORE, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
BEFORE LEE, C.J., BARNES, ISHEE 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. James Harris was convicted of house burglary on May 23, 2003, and sentenced to twenty-five years as a habitual offender in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. He filed a direct appeal of his conviction, which this Court affirmed on February 22, 2005. Harris's petition for rehearing and petition for a writ of certiorari were subsequently denied.
¶2. Harris then filed an application for leave to proceed in the circuit court, but the Mississippi Supreme Court denied his request on September 22, 2010. Three years later, Harris filed a motion for post-conviction relief (PCR) with the Rankin Count Circuit Court on November 14, 2013, challenging his sentence, specifically, his classification as a habitual offender. The circuit court dismissed Harris's petition as time-barred.
¶3. Harris now appeals the dismissal of his PCR motion. Finding tat the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to consider the motion, we affirm the dismissal of Harris's PCR motion.
¶4. A PCR motion may be dismissed by the circuit court without an evidentiary hearing " [i]f it plainly appears from the face of the motion, any annexed exhibits and the prior proceedings in the case that the movant is not entitled to any relief." Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-11(2) (Supp. 2014).
¶5. " When a case is affirmed on direct appeal, permission from the Mississippi Supreme Court must be obtained in order to seek post-conviction relief in the circuit court." Campbell v. State, 75 So.3d 1160, 1161-62 (¶ 7) (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (citing Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-7 (Supp. 2011)). " This procedure is not merely advisory, but jurisdictional." Id. at 1162 (¶ 7) (quoting Caldwell v. State, 9 So.3d 432, 433 (¶ 6) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008)). The supreme court's denial of an application for leave to proceed in the circuit court " is a final judgment and ...