LAMONTAY MARSH A/K/A LAMONTAY D. MARSH A/K/A LAMONTAY D'SHAWN MARSH A/K/A MOE APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE
COURT FROM LAUDERDALE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. JUSTIN MILLER
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: LAMONTAY MARSH (PRO SE)
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY:
SCOTT STUART JASON L. DAVIS
GRIFFIS, P.J., ISHEE AND GREENLEE, JJ.
This is an appeal from Lauderdale County Circuit Court where
LaMontay Marsh moved for post-conviction collateral relief
(PCR), which was denied. On appeal, Marsh asserts that the
circuit court erred because (1) his indictment contained the
word "unlawfully" instead of "without
authority of law"; (2) he is actually innocent; and (3)
his trial counsel's assistance was ineffective. Because
(1) the term "unlawfully" is synonymous and
interchangeable with the phrase "without authority of
law"; (2) Marsh failed to demonstrate that it is more
likely than not that no reasonable juror would convict him;
and (3) we fail to see that the assistance of Marsh's
counsel was ineffective, we affirm the circuit court's
denial of Marsh's motion for PCR.
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On March 21, 2012, Marsh was indicted for capital murder for
the killing of Thomas Eugene Tedeschi while engaged in the
commission of the felony crime of armed robbery, in violation
of Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-3-19(2)(e) (Rev.
2006). On November 29, 2012, Marsh entered a guilty
and, per the recommendation of a plea agreement with the
district attorney's office, was adjudged guilty of
noncapital murder and sentenced to serve a term of life
imprisonment in the custody of the Mississippi Department of
Corrections with the possibility of parole.
On July 23, 2015, Marsh moved for PCR. On January 5, 2016,
the Lauderdale County Circuit Court denied Marsh's motion
for PCR. On January 22, 2016, Marsh appealed the circuit
court's decision to this Court.
On appeal, Marsh asserts three errors: (1) his indictment did
not contain the words "without the authority of
law"; (2) he is actually innocent; and (3) his trial
counsel's assistance was ineffective.
¶5. We review the denial of PCR for clear error;
however, questions of law are reviewed de novo. Ryals v.
State, 51 So.3d 974, 975 (¶4) (Miss. App. Ct.