DEVANTAE MOORE DEVANTAE ANTONIO MOORE DEVANTAE MOORE APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE (2025)

¶1. On May 23, 2023, Devantae Antonio Moore filed a “Motion to Vacate and Set Aside Plea Recommendation” in the Circuit Court of Jasper County, Mississippi. The circuit court summarily dismissed Moore's claim for post-conviction collateral relief (PCR) on January 12, 2024. Moore appealed.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2. On August 17, 2017, Moore pled guilty to gratification of lust pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-5-23(1) (Supp. 2015). The “Final Judgment and Sentence of the Court” was entered on that same date. Moore was sentenced to a term of fifteen years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with eight years to serve, followed by seven years of post-release supervision.

¶3. Moore's first PCR motion was filed on December 23, 2019. An order denying his claim for relief was entered on February 7, 2020. On September 4, 2020, Moore filed a notice of appeal. By an en banc order of this Court entered on September 9, 2021, Moore's appeal was dismissed in appellate case 2020-TS-01004-COA as untimely filed.

¶4. In his present PCR motion, Moore claims that he is entitled to relief because (1) the State did not establish a factual basis for his plea of guilty; (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; and, (3) the trial judge could only impose a sentence of fifteen years upon a “petit jury's verdict.” The trial court summarily dismissed his PCR motion, finding that Moore had failed to demonstrate that he is entitled to any relief. See Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-11(2) (Rev. 2020).

STANDARD OF REVIEW

¶5. In McConn v. State, 355 So. 3d 779, 782-83 (¶9) (Miss. Ct. App. 2023), this Court stated:

A circuit court may summarily dismiss a PCR motion “[i]f it plainly appears from the face of the motion, any annexed exhibits and the prior proceedings in the case that the movant is not entitled to any relief.” Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-11(2) (Rev. 2020). The Mississippi Supreme Court has stated that summary “dismissal of a PCR motion is proper where it appears beyond a doubt that the [movant] can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” State v. Santiago, 773 So. 2d 921, 924 (¶11) (Miss. 2000) (quotation marks omitted). “Our review of the summary dismissal of a PCR motion, a question of law, is de novo.” Nichols v. State, 265 So. 3d 1239, 1241 (¶6) (Miss. Ct. App. 2018) (citing Young v. State, 731 So. 2d 1120, 1122 (¶9) (Miss. 1999)).

ANALYSIS

¶6. Moore was convicted on August 17, 2017. He filed his PCR motion on May 23, 2023. Pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-5(2) (Rev. 2020), Moore had three years from the date of his conviction to file for relief. Moore has not raised any express statutory exception to this time-bar. Because Moore's motion was filed more than three years after his conviction, it is time-barred. See Brown v. State, 391 So. 3d 225, 227 (¶3) (Miss. Ct. App. 2024).

¶7. Further, as noted above, Moore had previously filed a PCR motion that the circuit court denied. This Court dismissed the appeal as untimely filed. Pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-23(6) (Rev. 2020), Moore's motion is also barred as a second or successive motion.

CONCLUSION

¶8. We find that Moore's PCR motion was properly dismissed as being time-barred and as a successive motion.

¶9. AFFIRMED.

EMFINGER, J., FOR THE COURT:

BARNES, C.J., CARLTON AND WILSON, P.JJ., WESTBROOKS, McDONALD, LAWRENCE, McCARTY AND WEDDLE, JJ., CONCUR. ST. PÉ, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.