ROBERT M. MASSEY A/K/A MATT MASSEY, APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, APPELLEE
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: JONES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/18/2014. TRIAL JUDGE: HON. BILLY JOE LANDRUM. TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: DENIED PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF.
ROBERT M. MASSEY, APPELLANT, Pro se.
FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BY: MELANIE DOTSON THOMAS.
BEFORE IRVING, P.J., CARLTON AND JAMES, JJ.
¶1. Robert M. Massey (pro se) appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Jones County denying his petition for post-conviction relief (PCR). Finding no error, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2. Massey was indicted for sexual battery in violation of Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-3-95(1)(c)(Rev.2014). Massey pled guilty to the sexual-battery charge on March 14, 2008. The trial court sentenced Massey to thirty years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with thirteen years to serve and seventeen years suspended upon the successful completion of four years of post-release supervision and successful completion of the assigned community-service program.
¶3. On January 1, 2014, Massey filed a petition to clarify his sentence, which the trial court treated as a PCR petition. Massey argued that his sentence of four years of post-release supervision violated the maximum sentence of thirty years under section 97-3-95(1)(c). The trial court denied relief. The trial court found that Massey's sentence was proper and did not violate any statutory provisions.
¶4. The trial court stated in its order that the " [p]etitioner claims that the four (4) years of post-release supervision adds four (4) years to the maximum thirty (30) year sentence. However, the four (4) years of post-release supervision is included in the 17 year suspended time, and thus, it does not add to his sentence." The trial court confirmed that the four-year term of post-release supervision is a condition of the suspended seventeen years of Massey's sentence.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶5. In reviewing trial court's decision to deny a PCR petition, an appellate court will not disturb the trial court's factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous. Rowland v. State, 42 So.3d 503, 506 (¶ ...