Richard Orlando Edwards v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2000-CP-00327-COA
RICHARD ORLANDO EDWARDS
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLANT
APPELLEE
01/27/2000
HON. JOHN H. WHITFIELD
HARRISON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
PRO SE
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: DEIRDRE MCCRORY
CONO A. CARANNA II
CIVIL - POST CONVICTION RELIEF
DISMISSED
AFFIRMED - 07/16/2002
7/29/2002; denied 9/17/2002
BEFORE McMILLIN, C.J., MYERS, AND CHANDLER, JJ.
MYERS, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1. This is an appeal of the dismissal of Richard Orlando Edwards' motion for post-conviction relief.
FACTS
¶2. Richard Orlando Edwards pled guilty to transfer of a controlled substance in the Circuit Court of the
First Judicial District of Harrison County before the Honorable John H. Whitfield. He was sentenced to a
term of seventeen years, suspended, with five years supervised probation. Two months later, Edwards was
found to have violated his probation, which was subsequently revoked. Edwards filed his motion for postconviction relief in February 1999. The circuit court held that he did not meet the procedural requirements
and denied his motion.
ANALYSIS
¶3. Edwards asserts that he was wrongly incarcerated when his supervised probation was revoked without
being tried and convicted of the traffic violations which were the cause of the revocation. Edwards was
charged with reckless driving, driving with a suspended license, failure to yield to blue lights and siren and
resisting arrest. These are exactly the offenses forbidden by the conditions of the post release supervision
order.
¶4. A conviction of these traffic violations was not necessary to revoke Edwards' probation. Younger v.
State, 749 So. 2d 219, 222 (¶12) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999). It need only be shown that the defendant "more
likely than not" violated the terms of the supervised release agreement. Id., quoting Berdin v. State, 648
So. 2d 73, 78 (Miss. 1994). We find no error with the lower court's ruling in this matter.
¶5. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
HARRISON COUNTY DISMISSING MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF IS
AFFIRMED. COSTS OF APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO HARRISON COUNTY.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE,
IRVING, CHANDLER AND BRANTLEY, JJ., CONCUR.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
