Opinion

Brown v. State

  • 88 So. 3d 726
  • 2012 Miss. LEXIS 155
  • 2012 WL 954229
Court
Mississippi Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 22, 2012
Status
Published
Author
Dickinson
On the bench
Carlson, Chandler, Dickinson, King, Kitchens, Lamar, Pierce, Randolph, Waller
Cited by
9 cases

affirming trial court's denial of post-conviction relief

How later courts described this case

  • affirming trial court's denial of post-conviction relief
  • “Rule 22 is intended to allow a petitioner to gather information to support an application to the Supreme Court for leave to file a motion for post-conviction relief in the trial court.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

DICKINSON, Presiding Justice,

Dissenting:

¶23. Under Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(c)(4)(ii), Brown unquestionably was entitled to the files and discovery he requested. But because a *734 procedural statute conflicts with the rule, the majority says the statute must control. I do not believe the Legislature has the authority to pass procedural rules in the first place; and I certainly do not agree that procedural statutes should control over a conflicting Court rules. The majority is of a different view, so I respectfully dissent.

CHANDLER, J., JOINS THIS OPINION.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.