 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bailey v. State11/26/1997
tion based on pleas nolo contendere - just as if the professional had pled guilty or been found guilty by a jury. See, e.g., Miss. Code Ann. §§ 37-3-2 (public school teachers); 73-15-29 (nurses); 73-19-23 (optometrists); 73-38-27 (speech pathologists and audiologists); 83-57-39 (insurance salespersons). See also Miss. Code Ann. § 17-17-505 (applicants for solid waste permits may be rejected for pleas of nolo contendere to certain crimes). This rule also applies to attorney discipline cases, such that an attorney may be automatically disbarred for pleading guilty or pleading nolo contendere to certain crimes. Rules of Discipline for the Mississippi State Bar, Rule 6.
. Furthermore, Mississippi statutes on municipal court powers provide that (upon the entry of a plea of nolo contendere) municipal judges "shall convict" a defendant "of the offense charged and shall proceed to sentence the defendant according to law." The conviction may be appealed "as in other cases." Miss. Code Ann. § 21-23-7 (8). No corresponding statute appears to be in place for Justice Courts (such as the one in which Bailey originally pled nolo contendere). Thus, defendants who plead nolo contendere in municipal court would be convicted by statute. A different result by operation of caselaw in justice court would raise serious Equal Protection issues.
. Moreover, this Court has applied the enhanced DUI sentencing structure fairly stringently, regardless of the circumstances of the underlying convictions. For example, an accused's previous DUI convictions made without the benefit of counsel and not resulting in a prison sentence can be used to enhance the penalty in later DUI cases. Ghoston v. State, 645 So. 2d 936, 938-39 (Miss. 1994); Sheffield v. City of Pass Christian, 556 So. 2d 1052, 1053 (Miss. 1990). The reason being that the prior convictions were "constitutionally valid in and of themselves" and would still be valid for the purpose of enhancing punishment under the DUI statutes. Sheffield, 556 So. 2d at 1053. Furthermore, this Court has referred to the judgement following the acceptance of the nolo contendere plea as a conviction. See Sanchez v. City of Picayune, 656 So. 2d 92 (Miss. 1995).
. In addition, other jurisdictions considering this question have determined that a nolo contendere plea may be used to enhance punishment on a subsequent plea. See Snyder v. State, 879 P. 2d 1025, 1031 (App. Ct. Alaska 1994) ("the only forbidden consequence of a nolo plea is its use as an admission in a civil action . . . all other uses of the conviction are permissible as if the plea were of guilty. . . . In sentencing [the defendant] as a fourth DWI offender the court did not purport to find that he had admitted previous incidents of DWI; rather, it relied on the fact that he had previously been convicted of the offense.") (overruled on other grounds in Snyder v. State, 930 P. 2d 1274 (Alaska 1996)); In re: Lewis, 209 N.W. 2d 203, 209 (Mich. 1973); State v. Staples, 124 A. 2d 187, 189 (N.H. 1956). See also United States v. One Lot of Eighteen Firearms, 325 F. Supp. 1326, 1328 (D. N.H. 1971) (possession of firearms by felon case where conviction of underlying felony was satisfied by nolo contendere plea). Furthermore, in the context of determining habitual offender status, the majority view is that a judgement based on a nolo contendere plea is a conviction. State v. Goodwin, 593 P. 2d 326, 328-9 (Colo. 1979).
. There are, however, two distinct views among other jurisdictions that have considered similar cases:
The majority position differentiates between allowing the collateral use of a nolo contendere plea as an admission of misconduct and allowing the collateral use of the fact of a
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|