Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gray v. State

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

April 17, 2018

JAMES HOWARD GRAY A/K/A JAMES GRAY APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

          DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/21/2016

          SCOTT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. VERNON R. COTTON JUDGE

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: JAMES HOWARD GRAY (PRO SE)

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: LISA L. BLOUNT

          BEFORE IRVING, P.J., CARLTON AND GREENLEE, JJ.

          IRVING, P.J.

         ¶1. James Howard Gray, proceeding pro se, appeals the judgment of the Scott County Circuit Court and argues that the court erred in dismissing his motion for post-conviction relief (PCR) for four reasons: (1) his motion should not have been barred as a successive writ; (2) his sentence was illegal; (3) his probation should not have been revoked; and (4) he was denied counsel at his revocation hearing. We affirm.

         FACTS

         ¶2. On April 3, 2007, Gray was indicted on one count of statutory rape. On February 18, 2008, he pleaded guilty to the lesser crime of gratification of lust. He was sentenced to fifteen years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), with ten years suspended and five years to serve, followed by five years of post-release supervision. The court also ordered him to pay a $1, 500 fine and court costs in monthly installments of $150. According to the State, Gray's post-release supervision began on April 11, 2013.

         ¶3. On March 27, 2014, Gray was arrested on three counts of uttering a forgery in Scott County. He was subjected to a revocation hearing; however, the circuit court did not revoke his post-release supervision. Essentially, Gray was given a second chance to abide by the conditions of his post-release supervision; however, on June 13, 2014, he was charged with two counts of grand larceny. On August 18, 2014, a second revocation hearing was held, and Gray's MDOC probation officer Michael Gilmer testified about Gray's most recent arrest and his failure to pay the fine and court costs to the circuit clerk in the amount of $1, 593, as ordered by the court. As a result, his post-release supervision was revoked. Gray was not represented by counsel at the revocation hearing.

         ¶4. By Gray's own admission in his current PCR motion, he has previously filed two PCR motions attacking his sentence and the revocation of his post-release supervision. As noted by the court in its order, on May 22, 2015, Gray filed a motion to clarify, and on November 9, 2015, he filed a motion to reconsider his sentence. The court treated them as PCR motions and denied both. Gray did not appeal either denial.

         ¶5. On February 4, 2016, Gray filed a third PCR motion that is the basis for this current appeal, again, attacking his sentence and revocation. Consequently, the court denied and dismissed his motion as a procedurally barred successive writ. Gray appeals.

         DISCUSSION

         ¶6. "When reviewing a lower court's decision to deny a [PCR motion, an appellate court] will not disturb the trial court's factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous." Brown v. State, 731 So.2d 595, 598 (ΒΆ6) (Miss. 1999). "But when issues of law are raised, the proper standard of review ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.