NICHOLAS D. BROWN A/K/A NICHOLAS BROWN A/K/A NICOLAS BROWN APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE
OF JUDGMENT: 10/31/2016
FROM WHICH APPEALED: SIMPSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. EDDIE
H. BOWEN TRIAL JUDGE
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: NICHOLAS D. BROWN (PRO SE).
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY:
LAURA HOGAN TEDDER.
GRIFFIS, P.J., WESTBROOKS AND TINDELL, JJ.
Nicholas D. Brown, appearing pro se, appeals the Simpson
County Circuit Court's denial of his motion for
postconviction relief (PCR). Finding no error, we affirm.
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In March 2014, Brown pleaded guilty to Count I, possession of
12.1 milliliters of a Schedule II controlled substance,
codeine, and Count II, possession of 1.2 grams of a Schedule
II controlled substance, cocaine. At his plea hearing, Brown
requested to enter a drug-court program. The trial court
withheld acceptance of Brown's guilty plea and placed
Brown on nonadjudicated probation. The court also accepted
Brown's request to enter a drug-court program.
In 2015, Brown was found to have violated the terms and
conditions of the drug-court program. The trial court found that
Brown's nonadjudicated status should be revoked and
accepted his guilty plea. Brown was sentenced to twenty-four
years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of
In October 2015, Brown filed a PCR motion in the circuit
court in cause number 2013-90. In August 2016, Brown filed
another PCR motion in the circuit court in cause number
2015-291, alleging that his counsel was ineffective, his plea
was involuntary, and his search warrant was invalid. In
November 2016, Brown filed two more PCR motions in cause
number 2015-291, again alleging ineffective assistance of
counsel and that his plea was involuntary. The record
reflects that at one time, Brown had a total of four PCR
motions before the circuit court.
In November 2016, the Simpson County Circuit Court denied
Brown's PCR motions in cause number 2015-291. Brown
"We review a circuit court's denial of a PCR motion
under a clearly-erroneous standard of review."
Vanwey v. State, 147 So.3d 367, 369 (¶8) (Miss.
Ct. App. 2014) (citation omitted). "[H]owever, we review
the [circuit] court's legal conclusions under a de novo
standard of review." Jackson v. State, 178
So.3d 807, 809 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (citation
Voluntariness of Plea and Assistance of
Brown asserts that his guilty plea was involuntary because he
received ineffective assistance of counsel. He maintains that
his lawyer failed to properly assist with his defense. Brown
asserts that he would not have pleaded guilty if he would
have received effective assistance from his attorney.
"The burden of proving that a guilty plea was
involuntary is on the defendant and must be proven by a
preponderance of the evidence." Walton v.
State, 16 So.3d 66, 70 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2009)
(citation omitted). "A guilty plea is deemed
'voluntary and intelligent' only where the defendant
is advised concerning the nature of the charge against him
and the consequences of the plea." Id.
The record clearly indicates that Brown was informed of the
nature of the charges against him and the consequences of his
plea. The following is ...