MEIKA DESEAN BRITTON A/K/A M. DESEAN BRITTON A/K/A MEIKA D. BRITTON A/K/A MEIKE BRITTON A/K/A MEIKA BRITTON A/K/A MEIKO DESEAN BRITTON APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE
OF JUDGMENT: 02/14/2017
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, HON. GERALD W. CHATHAM SR.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: MEIKA DESEAN BRITTON (PRO SE)
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY:
BARBARA WAKELAND BYRD.
LEE, C.J., BARNES AND TINDELL, JJ.
In this appeal, we must determine if Meika Britton's
postrelease supervision (PRS) was properly revoked. Finding
no error, we affirm.
Britton was convicted of child exploitation and sentenced to
serve five years in the custody of the Mississippi Department
of Corrections (MDOC), followed by ten years of PRS. Upon
release from prison, Britton was charged with committing
child exploitation and contributing to the delinquency of a
minor. The State moved to revoke Britton's PRS based upon
his new crimes and his failure to pay court-ordered fees.
After a revocation hearing conducted over two days on April
18, 2016, and May 13, 2016, the trial court revoked
Britton's PRS and ordered him to serve ten years in the
custody of the MDOC.
Britton subsequently filed a motion to "reinstate"
his PRS. Treating this as a motion for
postconviction relief (PCR), the trial court found
Britton's arguments to be without merit and denied his
motion. Britton now appeals, asserting the following issues:
(1) minimum due-process requirements were not met at his
revocation hearing; (2) counsel provided ineffective
assistance; (3) insufficient evidence was presented to
support the revocation; and (4) his cell phone was searched
without a valid search warrant.
Absent a finding that the "ruling was clearly
erroneous[, ]" this Court will not reverse a trial
court's denial of a PCR motion. Jones v. State,
994 So.2d 829, 830 (¶4) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (citing
Kirksey v. State, 728 So.2d 565, 567 (¶8)
(Miss. 1999)). "However, when issues of law are raised,
the proper standard of review is de novo." Steele v.
State, 991 So.2d 176, 177 (¶3) (Miss. Ct. App.
2008) (citing Brown v. State, 731 So.2d 595, 598
(¶6) (Miss. 1999)).