LEONARD EARL BROWN APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE (2025)

¶1. A defendant filed a petition seeking permission to file an out-of-time appeal nearly 15 years after he was convicted of 2 felonies. The trial court dismissed his petition without reaching the merits, finding it was time-barred and not subject to any exceptions. Finding no error, we affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2. In November 2008, a jury convicted Leonard Brown Jr. of kidnapping and burglary of a dwelling. A week later, the trial court sentenced him. For the kidnapping charge, Brown was sentenced to a term of 15 years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with 5 years to serve and 10 years suspended, followed by 5 years of post-release supervision. For the burglary charge, he was sentenced to 10 years, all suspended, set to run concurrently.

¶3. Brown's trial counsel moved for an appeal bond, which the trial court denied in December 2008. This motion included the following statements: “The Defendant will appeal his case to the Mississippi Supreme Court within ten days if and when the Court Denies his Motion for a New Trial which is now pending,” and “The Defendant has meritorious issues for appeal ․” Despite these indications, neither Brown nor his trial counsel filed a direct appeal.

¶4. In July 2009, Brown filed a motion pro se requesting permission to file an out-of-time appeal. The trial court denied his motion, and two months later, Brown filed a notice of appeal from this decision. The Mississippi Supreme Court Clerk ultimately dismissed Brown's appeal because he failed to file an appellant's brief.

¶5. In July 2011, Brown was discharged from MDOC custody and began serving post-release supervision. After he was indicted on new charges a few months later, Brown's PRS was revoked and he was remanded into custody and ordered to serve the 10 years that were originally suspended.

¶6. Then in August 2017, Brown submitted to the Mississippi Supreme Court his “Application for Leave to Proceed in the Trial Court for the Circuit Court of Lee County, along with my Petition for Post Conviction Relief.” Because the Supreme Court found that Brown “ha[d] not appealed his convictions and sentences,” his filing was “dismissed as improperly filed,” citing “Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-7 (2015).”

¶7. In September 2023, nearly 6 years later, Brown filed a “Post Conviction Petition for Out of Time Appeal and For Other Relief” through new appellate counsel. He asserted that his trial counsel “did not perfect an appeal,” and he sought “[r]elief for an out of time appeal” under “Miss. R. App. Proc. Rule 4 (g) and (h), if applicable, and Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(1)(i),” as well as an evidentiary hearing.

¶8. The trial court summarily dismissed Brown's requested relief, finding that he “filed the present Motion[ ] nearly fifteen (15) years after his conviction,” and he “failed to assert any grounds for relief cognizable within” the designated statutory exceptions, “consistent with Howell v. State, 358 So. 3d 613 (Miss. 2023).”

¶9. Brown appeals, asserting that the trial court erred by not holding an evidentiary hearing on his petition and by denying him the opportunity to file an out-of-time appeal.

DISCUSSION

¶10. “When reviewing a trial court's denial or dismissal of a PCR petition, we will only disturb the trial court's factual findings if they are clearly erroneous; however, we review the trial court's legal conclusions under a de novo standard of review.” Shanks v. State, 396 So. 3d 1199, 1201 (¶7) (Miss. Ct. App. 2024) (quoting Cuevas v. State, 304 So. 3d 1163, 1167 (¶19) (Miss. Ct. App. 2020)). We find Brown's PCR petition was untimely filed, and there was no proof it was subject to any exception to the time-bar.

¶11. Under Mississippi law, when no direct appeal has been taken, “a PCR motion must be filed ․ within three (3) years after the time for taking an appeal from the judgment of conviction or sentence has expired.’ ” Hyland v. State, 401 So. 3d 1056, 1058 (¶10) (Miss. Ct. App. 2024) (quoting Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2) (Rev. 2020)). Post-conviction “claims are time-barred if they are filed beyond the three-year time period unless the claim fits within one of the express statutory exceptions.” Bell v. State, 378 So. 3d 420, 421 (¶4) (Miss. Ct. App. 2023) (emphasis added) (citing Howell, 358 So. 3d at 615 (¶¶7-8)). The defendant “must prove an exception applies” to overcome the statutory bar. Id. at 421 (¶5); Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2) (listing the statutory exceptions to the three-year time bar).

¶12. Here, Brown was convicted of kidnapping and burglary charges in November 2008. On the day of sentencing, he filed a motion through trial counsel seeking a new trial or judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The trial court entered its order denying his motion in December 2008. Brown then had 30 days to file a notice of appeal, which accrued in January 2009. As such, Brown's time for appeal expired in January 2009.

¶13. It is undisputed that Brown never filed a direct appeal after his conviction. Brown had 3 years to file a PCR petition after his appeal window expired, so the statute of limitations period for his claims ran out in January 2012. He did not file any such petition. Therefore, the trial court did not err in finding the 2023 petition time-barred.

CONCLUSION

¶14. We find that Brown's PCR motion was untimely filed and not subject to an exception from the statutory bar and affirm the trial court's dismissal.

¶15. AFFIRMED.

McCARTY, J., FOR THE COURT:

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