 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Lawson v. State9/21/2004
el's performance was deficient and, if so, whether the deficiency prejudiced the defendant to the point that he was denied a fair trial. Id. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. This standard is also applicable to a guilty plea. Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 57-58, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985).
9. At Lawson's plea hearing, he testified that he had not been threatened or intimidated into entering his plea. Therefore, Lawson's sworn testimony at his plea hearing contradicts his assertion in his motion for post-conviction relief.
10. Lawson's claim that he could not have been charged as an habitual offender is clearly wrong. Lawson's assertion is based on his contention that at least one of his prior offenses occurred before the habitual offender statute went into effect. Lawson argues that the State's use of the offenses prior to the statute taking effect would have been an impermissible ex post facto application of that statute. However, in Smith v. State, 465 So.2d 999, 1003 (Miss.1985), the Mississippi Supreme Court decided this issue squarely against Lawson's position.
11. In Smith, the court held that "the sentence as a fourth offender or habitual criminal is not to be viewed as either a new jeopardy or additional penalty for the earlier crimes. It is a stiffened penalty for the latest crime, which is considered to be an aggravated offense because a repetitive one." Id. Therefore, Lawson is incorrect in his assertion that he could not have been sentenced as an habitual offender due to the fact that one of his prior convictions occurred before the habitual offender statute went into effect.
12. As such, Lawson's assertion that he received ineffective assistance of counsel is without merit. His attorney properly informed him that if he did not accept the plea bargain, the State would charge him as an habitual offender and he would be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Therefore, we find that Lawson's attorney's performance was not deficient.
13. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LOWNDES COUNTY DENYING POST-CONVICTION RELIEF IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE TAXED TO LOWNDES COUNTY.
Page 1 2 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|