OF JUDGMENT: 09/18/2015
FROM WHICH APPEALED: SUNFLOWER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON.
CAROL L. WHITE-RICHARD, JUDGE
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: ANTHONY L. SCHMIDT, JR. OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DARRELL C. BAUGHN
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: ROBERT BOYD (PRO SE)
The Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC) appeals the
Sunflower County Circuit Court's decision requiring it to
develop a parole case plan for Robert Boyd. We reverse and
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In 1986, Boyd was convicted of murder and two counts of
aggravated assault. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for
the murder, and to four years for each aggravated assault. In
May 2001, MDOC released Boyd on parole. But eight years
later, he absconded supervision and his parole was revoked.
Boyd was released on parole a second time in September 2010,
but again violated the terms of his parole and it was revoked
In July 2015, Boyd asked MDOC to implement a parole case plan
for him in accordance with newly enacted Mississippi Code
Section 47-7-3.1. Boyd filed his "first step" with
MDOC's Administrative Remedy Program (ARP). In response, MDOC
said that House Bill 585 was not retroactive and that it
applied only to those offenders sentenced on or after July 1,
2014. MDOC informed Boyd that he was not entitled to a parole
case plan, but that he would "continue to be considered
for Parole Docket and be reviewed by the Parole Board."
Boyd proceeded to ARP's "second step, " and
MDOC again informed him that he was not entitled to a parole
Boyd then filed a motion for judicial review in the Circuit
Court of Sunflower County,  and the circuit judge reversed
MDOC's decision, finding that Section 47-7-3.1 applied
retroactively to offenders sentenced before July 1, 2014.
After that ruling, Boyd filed a motion for clarification of
order, asking the trial court to "clarify [its] order of
reversal to include specific instructions to MDOC to issue a
'case plan' to [him]." MDOC responded with a
motion to stay enforcement of the trial court's order
until this Court issued an opinion in Fisher v.
Drankus, 204 So.3d 1232 (Miss. 2016). MDOC also appealed
to this Court. The circuit judge then denied Boyd's
motion for clarification as untimely and granted MDOC's
motion to stay. On appeal, MDOC presents two arguments:
1. Boyd is not eligible to receive a parole case plan
pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-3.1, since he was
convicted prior to July 1, 2014; and
2. Boyd is not eligible for "presumptive parole"
pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-18, since he was