EDDRICK KING A/K/A EDDRICK LEPATRICK KING A/K/A PATRICK KING APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE
OF JUDGMENT: 06/02/2016
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. RICHARD A. SMITH TRIAL JUDGE
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: EDDRICK KING (PRO SE)
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY:
LISA L. BLOUNT
IRVING, P.J., BARNES AND WESTBROOKS, JJ.
Eddrick King appeals the Leflore County Circuit Court's
dismissal of his petition for postconviction relief (PCR). On
appeal, King asserts that his guilty plea to armed robbery
was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made and
that his counsel was ineffective. Finding no error, we
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On March 22, 2004, a Leflore County grand jury indicted
Eddrick King and Tywanda Jackson for capital murder and
kidnapping. The trial court appointed Ray Charles Carter from
the Office of Capital Defense to represent King. Thereafter,
King waived indictment and entered guilty pleas to the
charges of manslaughter, armed robbery, and kidnapping.
Pursuant to the plea deal, King was sentenced to twenty years
for manslaughter, thirty years for armed robbery, and five
years for kidnapping. The sentences for manslaughter and
armed robbery were ordered to run concurrently, and the
sentence for kidnapping was ordered to run consecutively to
the sentences in the first two counts.
On January 7, 2016, King filed his PCR petition, arguing that
his guilty plea to armed robbery was not knowingly,
voluntarily, and intelligently made. In his petition, King
claimed that he was reluctant to plead guilty to armed
robbery, since he was actually innocent of the crime.
However, King asserts that his attorney induced him to plead
guilty by "promising" him that he would be eligible
for parole after serving ten years of his thirty-year
sentence. King attached supporting affidavits from his
mother, Elizabeth Fair, and sister, Cassandra Fair. Both
affidavits stated that King was told that he would become
eligible for parole after serving ten years of his sentence.
On April 19, 2016, the trial court held an evidentiary
hearing, and King, Elizabeth, and Carter testified. Neither
the written transcript nor the audio recording of the guilty
pleas was available. Carter testified that he represented
King as an attorney employed by Mississippi Capital Defense.
According to Carter, he never makes statements to his clients
about their parole eligibility. Carter also testified that he
did not recall King's mother being present when Carter
discussed the guilty pleas with King and could not remember
her being available a single time when he spoke with King.
Carter testified that he had no reason to believe that King
was incompetent at the moment that King agreed to the plea.
After Carter's testimony, Elizabeth testified that during
King's plea deal she heard Carter tell King that he had
to serve ten years or less. Elizabeth testified that she
spoke with King regarding his plea, and he reiterated that he
had to serve ten years of his sentence or less. When asked if
King was content with the plea, Elizabeth stated that she did
not think King was satisfied.
King testified that he asked Carter questions about the plea
because he was considering going to trial to prove his
innocence, but Carter advised against a trial. King testified
that he was induced to take a plea by Carter's promise
that he would be released in ten years, with good behavior.
King testified that he wanted to go to trial on the
armed-robbery charge, because he was actually innocent of the
When asked if he remembered being informed about parole,
probation, good time, or trusty time, King testified that he
did not recall. King testified that he only remembered
Carter's promise that he would only serve ten years. King
was questioned about his legal representation prior to Carter
being assigned his case. King admitted that he fired two
attorneys prior to Carter because he was dissatisfied with
their representation. ...