Beal v. State, 2018-CP-00007-COA

Decision Date11 September 2018
Docket NumberNO. 2018-CP-00007-COA,2018-CP-00007-COA
Citation270 So.3d 910
Parties Jessie T. BEAL a/k/a Jessie Beal, Appellant v. STATE of Mississippi, Appellee
CourtMississippi Court of Appeals

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: JESSIE T. BEAL (PRO SE)

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: ABBIE EASON KOONCE, JACKSON

BEFORE GRIFFIS, P.J., BARNES AND CARLTON, JJ.

CARLTON, J., FOR THE COURT:

¶ 1. On May 27, 2009, Jessie Beal pleaded guilty to statutory rape in Madison County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to twenty-three years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC). Beal now appeals the dismissal of his fourth motion for postconviction relief (PCR). Finding no error, we affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2. Beal was arrested for statutory rape of a child in violation of Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-3-65(1)(a) (Rev. 2014) on May 12, 2008. Beal's first indictment was nolle prosequied on June 30, 2008, and he was released on bond to await further action by the Madison County grand jury. A later indictment was brought on October 8, 2008. This indictment provides that the July 2008 grand jury was recalled on September 10, 2008. As found by this Court in addressing one of Beal's prior PCR motions, "the investigation was delayed because the victim was pregnant, and the State waited to indict until the baby was delivered and DNA tests could be performed to determine paternity."

Beal v. State , 118 So.3d 162, 165 (¶ 10) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) ( Beal II ).

¶ 3. Beal pleaded guilty to the statutory rape charge on May 27, 2009. The State described the factual basis for Beal's arrest and statutory rape charge at his guilty-plea hearing as follows:

[O]n or about the 25th day of April, 2008, the Department of Human Services was notified about a minor child who at that time was [fifteen], but would have been [fourteen] at the time. She ... tested positive at the school for being pregnant. The Department of Human Services went to the school where they interviewed the minor child .... That female child ... related to the Department of Human Services that she had had sex with the defendant, that the defendant resided in the same home that she was residing, which at that time was with her aunt. At that time, the Canton Police Department was also notified, based upon statements made by the victim in this case. A warrant was issued for Mr. Beal's arrest. Mr. Beal ... would have been [thirty-five] years of age at the time that this child was conceived. That conception date would have been between October 1st, 2007, and October 31st, 2007.
A DNA sample was taken of the child once the child was born in July. That sample was compared with the beucle (phonetic) swab, which was retrieved from this defendant, Mr. Jessie Beal. The State, if this case went to trial, [it] would call Dr. Bo Scales. Dr. Scales would testify that, based upon the DNA testing that he performed, that the probability of paternity in this case is 99.99 percent as compared to an untested, unrelated man of the same race. So based upon the statements of the victim in this case and the DNA testing of the child that was conceived, the State would show that they did in fact have sexual intercourse between those dates listed in the indictment and that that sexual intercourse did occur in Madison County, and that this defendant was more than thirty-six months older than the victim.

By a sentencing order dated July 8, 2009, the trial court sentenced Beal to twenty-three years in the custody of the MDOC.

¶ 4. To date, Beal has filed four PCR motions. Beal filed his first PCR motion on December 28, 2009, alleging that he was denied his right to a timely initial appearance; his trial counsel was ineffective; and his guilty plea was involuntary. The trial court dismissed his motion. Beal appealed, arguing that his constitutional rights were violated when he was not given a timely initial appearance; his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to raise this issue; and his guilty plea was involuntary because it was influenced by the timing of his initial appearance. This Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that each of the issues Beal raised were without merit. Beal v. State , 58 So.3d 709, 710-11 (¶¶ 3-7) (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) ( Beal I ).

¶ 5. Beal filed his second PCR motion on November 2, 2011, alleging that the State's pre-indictment delay prejudiced his defense and that his guilty plea was not knowingly and intelligently entered. The trial court dismissed Beal's second PCR motion as a successive writ. Beal appealed, arguing that his constitutional rights were violated due to the State's pre-indictment delay and that his guilty plea was invalid because he did not knowingly waive his right against self-incrimination. This Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that Beal had no arguable basis for either of his claims, and thus his second PCR motion was not excepted from the successive-writ procedural bar. Beal II , 118 So.3d at 164-65 (¶¶ 3-12).

¶ 6. On February 2, 2015, Beal filed his third PCR motion, alleging that his indictment violated his rights against double jeopardy and that his trial counsel was ineffective because he did not raise this issue. The trial court dismissed Beal's third PCR motion as time-barred and as a successive writ. Also, in its order allowing Beal to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, the trial court, in relevant part, placed Beal on notice of Mississippi Code Annotated section 47-5-138(3)(a) (Rev. 2011).1 The trial court warned Beal of possible forfeiture of any earned time he had accumulated should any of his future filings "be determined by the Court to be frivolous, malicious, or [warranting] dismiss[al] for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted."

¶ 7. Beal appealed the trial court's judgment, arguing that he was subjected to double jeopardy because he was indicted a second time for the same crime found in a prior indictment that had been nolle prosequied. He also argued that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to raise the double-jeopardy claim. This Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no merit in Beal's double-jeopardy claim because the Mississippi Supreme Court has held that "the State can re-indict an accused for the same offense after an order of nolle prosequi has been entered." Beal v. State , 186 So.3d 943, 945 (¶ 8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) ( Beal III ) (quoting State v. Shumpert , 723 So.2d 1162, 1165 (¶ 16) (Miss. 1998) ). This Court also rejected Beal's ineffective-counsel claim as procedurally barred, as well as being without merit because it was based on his counsel's failure to raise the double-jeopardy claim, which the Court had already found was without merit. Id. at (¶¶ 10-11).

¶ 8. Beal filed his fourth PCR motion on November 21, 2017, alleging that there was no probable cause to arrest him in May 2008 on the statutory rape charge; that he was subjected to double jeopardy due to his indictment on the statutory rape charge that was in the prior indictment that had been nolle prosequied; and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court dismissed Beal's fourth PCR motion as time-barred and as a successive writ, determining that Beal's motion did not fall within any exception to these procedural bars. In dismissing Beal's lawsuit, the trial court confirmed that in addition to reviewing Beal's fourth PCR motion and exhibits, the Court had also reviewed the files for Beal's three previous postconviction relief filings, each of which contain a copy of petitioner's criminal file, and the opinions rendered by the Mississippi Court of Appeals in relation to Beal's three previous postconviction relief filings, identified above as Beal I , Beal II , and Beal III.

¶ 9. The trial court also dismissed Beal's fourth PCR motion as frivolous and deemed it a "final order" for purposes of section 47-5-138(3)(a).2 The trial court found that Beal's fourth PCR motion asserted essentially the same issues as those asserted in Beal's prior PCR motions, these prior PCR motions had been dismissed by the trial court, and each of those dismissals had been affirmed by the Mississippi Court of Appeals. The trial court also confirmed that it had placed Beal on notice of section 47-5-138(3)(a) in Cause No. 45CIl:15-cv-00048-c after his third PCR motion.

¶ 10. Beal appeals the dismissal of his fourth PCR motion, asserting, pro se, that (1) his constitutional rights were violated because there was no probable cause to arrest him in May 2008; (2) he was subjected to double jeopardy when he was indicted a second time for the same crime found in a prior indictment that had been nolle prosequied; and (3) he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his counsel did not raise either of these issues.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

¶ 11. "When reviewing a trial court's decision to dismiss a petition for postconviction relief, this Court will not disturb the trial court's factual findings unless they are found to be clearly erroneous." Stokes v. State , 238 So.3d 631, 633 (¶ 7) (Miss. Ct. App. 2018). "However, where questions of law are raised, the applicable standard of review is de novo." Id.

DISCUSSION

I. Procedural Bars

¶ 12. In its order dismissing Beal's fourth PCR motion, the trial court found that the motion was both time-barred and barred as a successive writ. The Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act (UPCCRA) provides that PCR motions must be filed within three years after entry of the judgement of conviction where a guilty plea has been made. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2) (Rev. 2015); see Avery v. State , 102 So.3d 1178, 1180 (¶ 5) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012). Beal pleaded guilty to the statutory rape charge brought against him on May 27, 2009. The trial court's judgment of conviction was entered that same day, and on July 8, 2009, the trial court entered its sentencing order, sentencing Beal to twenty-three years in the MDOC. Beal's fourth PCR motion...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Sims v. Morris
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi
    • August 5, 2021
    ... ... U.S.C. § 2254 (“Section 2254”), seeking for ... his state court conviction to be set aside, his sentence ... vacated, and a new trial. Doc. [1]. Sims ... on direct appeal in state court. Miss. Code Ann. § ... 99-39-5(2). See also Beal v. State , 270 So.3d 910 ... (Miss. Ct. App. 2018). Mississippi's filing deadline is ... ...
  • Chaffee ex rel. Latham v. Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • May 16, 2019
    ... ... and signed, she failed to mention that Fredrick had not followed directions, but she did state that she would no longer allow students to line up outside the restroom. Like the trial court, we ... ...
  • Murphy v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Court of Appeals
    • February 9, 2021
    ...a fundamental-constitutional-rights violation." Id . As the movant, Murphy bears the burden of proving that an exception applies. Beal v. State , 270 So. 3d 910, 914-15 (¶14) (Miss. Ct. App. 2018). ¶15. In addition to the fundamental-rights exceptions listed above, the supreme court has hel......
  • McDonald v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Court of Appeals
    • September 8, 2020
    ...claims fit within this exception. McDonald, as the movant, bears the burden of proving that the exception applies. E.g. , Beal v. State , 270 So. 3d 910, 914-15 (¶14) (Miss. Ct. App. 2018).¶5. McDonald alleges that (1) some of his indictments were defective or constructively amended, (2) th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT