Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Brown v. State

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

Decided March 20, 2012No. 2010-CP-01305-COAPublished

1Concurrence

BARNES, J.,

specially concurring:

¶ 16. I fully concur with the majority that Brown’s motion for post-conviction relief (PCR) is time-barred. However, I cannot leave unchallenged Judge Roberts’s conclusion in his separate opinion that the amendment to Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-5 eliminated the requirement that a person be in custody under the Mississippi sentence that he is challenging, and thus, Brown had standing to bring a motion for post-conviction relief. While the amendment alters the definition of custody to some extent, it does not delete the requirement of custody.

¶ 17.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Maleng v. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Lackawanna County District Attorney v. CossSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Daniels v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  4. Claypool v. MladineoMississippi Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Mississippi Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. GandyMississippi Supreme Court · 1973

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API