Glover v. State, 53647
| Decision Date | 15 September 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 53647,53647 |
| Citation | 419 So.2d 588 |
| Parties | Walter GLOVER v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Hermel Johnson, Jackson, for appellant.
Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Robert D. Findley, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
En Banc.
Appellant Walter Glover was indicted and convicted in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County for the possession of marijuana with the intent to deliver. He appeals his conviction and advances two assignments of error.
We shall not discuss the facts of the case or the assignments of error for the reason that a study of the record and briefs clearly reveals no reversible error.
We find a plain error that requires discussion for the Bench and Bar and a remand of the case. [Mississippi Supreme Court Rule 6]. There is no authority for the method used by the lower court in sentencing appellant. Contrarily, the authority is clear that he was erroneously sentenced.
The trial of appellant in the present case was had on September 13, 1981, at the September 1981 term of the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County. The sentencing hearing was conducted by the trial court on September 18, 1981, along with a revocation hearing involving a prior sentence received by appellant in the same court. This prior sentence came about as a result of a plea of guilty by appellant on January 22, 1979, for the crime of aggravated assault. The court on the date of that plea imposed a sentence of five years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. The entire five-year sentence was suspended and appellant placed on probation for that period of time.
After the sentencing hearing in the present case, the lower court imposed the sentence on appellant of ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Five years of the sentence were suspended with the further stipulation by the court; "I'm going to let the five (5) years run concurrent with your suspended sentence in cause number 0347." The suspension of this sentence was revoked.
The Bench and Bar should be reminded that the Legislature in 1942 laid out specific instructions on the imposition of concurrent or consecutive sentences. Prior to 1942 all multiple sentences were required to run consecutively. The Legislature in its 1942 session enacted Chapter 301, Laws of 1942, amending the prior sentencing statute. This amended act read as follows:
AN ACT to amend section 1319, Mississippi Code of 1930, so as to provide that circuit and county judges may impose sentences to run concurrently.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Mississippi, that section 1319, Mississippi Code of 1930, be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows:
In case of more than one conviction imprisonment on second to begin at end of first.
1319. When a person is sentenced to imprisonment on two or more convictions, the imprisonment on the second, or each subsequent conviction, shall commence at the termination of the imprisonment for the preceding conviction, and the sentence ought to so specify. Provided, however, that when a person is convicted at the same term of a circuit or county court of more than one offense, the judge of such court may impose sentences on such convictions to run concurrently.
The above quoted statute has been carried forward in Mississippi codes since its enactment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
House v. State
...justice. See, e.g., Richardson v. State, 436 So.2d 790, 791 (Miss.1983); Hooten v. State, 427 So.2d 1388, 1391 (Miss.1983); Glover v. State, 419 So.2d 588 (Miss.1982); Horton v. State, 408 So.2d 1197, 1200 (Miss.1982); Loeffler v. State, 396 So.2d 18 Taken together, the objections actually ......
-
Smith v. State
...this plain error in the sentencing order. Mississippi Supreme Court Rule 6(b); Payne v. State, 462 So.2d 902 (Miss.1984); Glover v. State, 419 So.2d 588 (Miss.1982), Burnett v. State, 285 So.2d 783 (Miss.1973). It is clear that the state sought conviction and sentence of the defendant as a ......
-
Payne v. State, 54904
...to remand this case for resentencing due to plain error in the sentencing order. Mississippi Supreme Court Rule 6(b); Glover v. State, 419 So.2d 588 (Miss.1982); Burnett v. State, 285 So.2d 783 (Miss.1973). We address, for the benefit of the bench and bar, two distinct problems with the sen......
-
Tate v. State, 55103
...III. Beyond that, the two sentences were imposed at different terms of the Circuit Court of Lowndes County, Mississippi. Glover v. State, 419 So.2d 588 (Miss.1982) holds that, under the law in effect at that time, the sentencing judge sitting at a subsequent term of court had no authority t......