Preview:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 95-CA-01181-SCT FRANK BRISCO v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED, PURSUANT TO M.R.A.P. 35-A DATE OF JUDGMENT: TRIAL JUDGE: COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: 10/16/95 HON. L. BRELAND HILBURN, JR. HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT PRO SE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: WAYNE SNUGGS BY: DEIRDRE McCRORY EDWARD J. PETERS CIVIL - POST CONVICTION RELIEF AFFIRMED - 12/4/97 12/30/97

DISTRICT ATTORNEY: NATURE OF THE CASE: DISPOSITION: MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED:

BEFORE PRATHER, P.J., BANKS AND McRAE, JJ. BANKS, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

This matter is before the court on appeal from a decision by the circuit court denying the appellant's motion for post-conviction relief without a hearing. We conclude that the petition to enter a guilty plea reflects the plea agreement which the petitioner actually received and that his bare assertion that a different agreement existed is insufficient to entitle him to an evidentiary hearing. I. The appellant, Frank Brisco, appeals a decision by the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, denying his Motion to Supplement and/or Amend Motion to Correct Sentence and/or in the Alternative to Reconsider. The appellant contends that he entered a plea

agreement with the State whereby he would receive a sentence not in excess of five (5) years in exchange for his guilty plea to three (3) criminal offenses and related testimony against co-defendant Lamar Abrams. Brisco claims the State failed to honor the terms of the plea agreement and that he is therefore entitled to an opportunity to reenter his plea to the offenses as a matter of law. We conclude that the circuit court was well within its authority to dismiss Brisco's motion pursuant to Miss. Code Ann.

Download Frank Brisco v. State of Mississippi.pdf

Mississippi Law