Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
34 Mississippi opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Madden v. Stategreen2 sentences2016“We will not reverse a trial court’s dismissal of a PCCR motion unless the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous.” Barker v. State, 126 So.3d 135, 136 (¶ 5) (Miss.Ct.App.2013) (citing Madden v. State, 75 So.3d 1130, 1131 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2011)). 2014A trial court’s decision to deny a PCCR motion will not be overturned on appeal “unless the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous.” Chapman v. State, 135 So.3d 184, 185 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2013) (citing Madden v. State, 75 So.3d 1130, 1131 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2011)). | 11 | 11 |
Chapman v. Stategreen2 sentences2016This Court will not overturn a trial court’s denial of a PCCR motion on appeal “unless the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous.” Chapman v. State, 135 So.3d 184, 185 (¶6) (Miss. 2016This Court will not overturn a trial court’s dismissal of a PCCR motion on appeal “unless the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous.” Chapman v. State, 135 So.3d 184, 185 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2013) (citation omitted). | 7 | 7 |
Roy Dale Wallace v. State of Mississippigreen2 sentences2019Wallace v. State, 180 So. 3d 767, 769 (¶7) (Miss. 2019Wallace v. State, 180 So. 3d 767, 769 (¶7) (Miss. | 2 | 7 |
Rowland v. Statered2 sentences2015However, in addition to the exceptions listed in section 99-39-5, “errors affecting fundamental constitutional rights are excepted from the procedural bars of the UPCCRA.” Rowland v. State, 42 So. 3d 503, 506 (¶9) (Miss. 2010). 2015However, in addition to the exceptions listed in section 99-39-5, “errors affecting fundamental constitutional rights are excepted from the procedural bars of the UPCCRA.” Rowland v. State, 42 So.3d 503, 506 (¶ 9) (Miss.2010). | 2 | 2 |
Mann v. Stategreen1 sentence2016When “reviewing a trial court’s dismissal of [a PCCR motion], ... [w]e will not disturb the trial court’s factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous.” Mann v. State, 2 So.3d 743, 745 (¶ 5) (Miss.Ct.App.2009). “[Wjhere questions of law are raised, the applicable standard of review is de novo.” Id. ¶4. | 1 | 1 |
Wilkerson v. Stategreen1 sentence2016When considering the dismissal of a PCCR motion, “we review the trial court’s findings of fact for clear error.” Wilkerson v. State, 89 So.3d 610, 613 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct.App.2011). | 1 | 1 |
Lyons v. Stategreen1 sentence2016The circuit court’s findings in that order are, therefore, conclusive.” Lyons, 990 So.2d at 265 (¶ 12). | 1 | 1 |
Barker v. Stategreen1 sentence2016“We will not reverse a trial court’s dismissal of a PCCR motion unless the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous.” Barker v. State, 126 So.3d 135, 136 (¶ 5) (Miss.Ct.App.2013) (citing Madden v. State, 75 So.3d 1130, 1131 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2011)). | 1 | 1 |
Massey v. Stategreen1 sentence2016“If a prisoner fails to raise all of his claims in his original [motion] for post-conviction relief, those claims will be procedurally barred if the petitioner seeks to bring them for the first time on appeal to this Court.” Massey v. State, 131 So.3d 1213, 1219 (¶29) (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Armon Randall v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2016Randall v. State, *1099 148 So.3d 686, 688 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App. 2014). | 1 | 1 |
Ford v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Ford v. State, 708 So.2d 73, 75 (¶ 11) (Miss.1998). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Further, this Court will affirm the summary dismissal of a PCCR motion if the movant fails to demonstrate “a claim procedurally alive substantially showing the denial of a state or federal right.” Robinson v. State, 19 So.3d 140, 142 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2009). ¶ 8. | 1 | 1 |
Strickland v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Strickland v. State, 43 So.3d 1179, 1181 (¶ 10) (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Cummings v. Stategreen1 sentence2015“The trial court may summarily dismiss a PCCR motion without an eviden-tiary hearing ‘if it plainly appears from the face of the motion, any annexed exhibits[,] and the prior proceedings in the case that the movant is not entitled to any relief.’ ” Cummings v. State, 130 So.3d 129, 131 (¶ 4) (Miss.Ct.App.2013) (quoting Miss. | 1 | 1 |
McDowell v. Stategreen1 sentence2014McDowell v. State, 917 So.2d 801, 802 (¶ 1) (Miss.Ct.App.2005). | 1 | 1 |
Creel v. Stategreen1 sentence2014Creel v. State, 814 So.2d 176, 177 (¶ 9) (Miss.Ct.App.2002). ¶ 5. | 1 | 1 |
Evans v. Stategreen1 sentence2014Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 678 (¶ 280) (Miss.1997). | 1 | 1 |
Chapman v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Chapman, 47 So.3d at 208-209 (¶¶ 17, 20, 23). | 1 | 1 |
Callins v. Stategreen1 sentence2013In reviewing the denial of a PCCR motion, an appellate court “will not disturb the trial court’s factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous.” Callins v. State, 975 So.2d 219, 222 (¶ 8) (Miss.2008). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Elroy Kennedy v. State of Mississippi
green
1 sentence2018Kennedy v. State , 179 So.3d 82 , 83 (¶ 5) (Miss. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence2014His first PCCR motion was considered in Williams v. State, 98 So.3d 1090 (Miss.Ct.App.2012), where we affirmed the denial of his PCCR motion that alleged speedy-trial violations. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences2014His second PCCR motion was considered in Williams v. State, 110 So.3d 840 (Miss.Ct. 2014His second PCCR motion was considered in Williams v. State, 110 So.3d 840 (Miss.Ct. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.