Phillip Knichel v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2001-CP-01477-COA
PHILLIP KNICHEL
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
08/23/2001
HON. C. E. MORGAN III
WINSTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
PRO SE
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JOHN R. HENRY, JR.
DOUG EVANS
CIVIL - POST CONVICTION RELIEF
POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED
AFFIRMED - 8/20/2002
9/10/2002
BEFORE KING, P.J., LEE, AND IRVING, JJ.
KING, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1. Phillip Knichel, acting pro se, appeals the dismissal of his request for post-conviction relief by the
Winston County Circuit Court. Knichel raises three issues for this Court's review that we cite verbatim:
I. Appellant's motion for post-conviction relief and supporting affidavits and papers
provided sufficient evidentiary facts and conclusory [sic] allegations to state claim for relief
on its face such that defendant was entitled to evidentiary hearing with respect to his
allegations.
II. The court erred in dismissing defendant's motion without any evidentiary hearing.
III. The circuit court failed to state why defendant's motion for post-conviction relief held no
merit, or to state any case's to base its denial on.
¶2. However, these three issues boil down to a single question, which is: whether the trial court erred in
denying Knichel an evidentiary hearing. Finding no error, we affirm.
FACTS
¶3. On July 24, 1999, Knichel escaped from a state correctional facility in Winston County, Mississippi. At
the time of his escape, Knichel was serving sentences for robbery and motor vehicle theft of fifteen years
and three years, respectively. Knichel was captured on the same day of his escape.
¶4. On October 25, 1999, Knichel was indicted for escape pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-49(1)
(Rev. 2000) and as an habitual offender pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-81 (Rev. 2000). On
November 15, 1999, Knichel entered a plea of guilty to the charge of escape. The trial court found that
Knichel's plea was voluntarily and intelligently made. The trial court determined that Knichel's punishment
for escape should be enhanced because of his prior convictions of robbery and motor vehicle theft.
Accordingly, Knichel was sentenced to serve three years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of
Corrections, without reduction, suspension, parole or probation.
¶5. On August 9, 2001, Knichel, pro se, filed a motion for post-conviction relief. On August 24, 2001, the
circuit court denied Knichel's motion for post-conviction relief.
ANALYSIS
Whether the trial court erred in denying Knichel an evidentiary hearing.
¶6. On appeal, Knichel argues several reasons why an evidentiary hearing should have been conducted.
Knichel argues that his plea was involuntarily entered, that his counsel was ineffective, that his indictment
was defective and that there existed evidence of material fact to grant an evidentiary hearing.
¶7. Mississippi Code Annotated Section 99-39-9(1) provides that a motion for post-conviction relief must
include (1) a concise statement of the grounds for relief, (2) a sworn statement of those facts within the
prisoner's personal knowledge, and (3) a statement of facts outside of the prisoner's personal knowledge
and how or by whom these facts will be proven. Affidavits of these persons and any supporting documents
should also be attached.
¶8. Upon receipt of this information, Section 99-39-11(1) requires the judge to examine promptly "[t]he
original motion, together with all of the files, records, transcripts and correspondences relating to the
judgment under attack." If after doing so, it appears that the movant is not entitled to any relief, the trial
judge, pursuant to Section 99-39-11(2), is authorized to enter an order of dismissal without conducting an
evidentiary hearing. Clearly, the decision to deny an evidentiary hearing is a matter within the sound
discretion of the trial court. Stovall v. State, 770 So. 2d 1019 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2000). The record
before this Court does not suggest that the trial court's discretion was abused.
¶9. Knichel failed to present in, or as a part of, his post-conviction relief motion, facts suggesting any
possible entitlement to relief. Accordingly, the trial court, pursuant to Section 99-39-11(2) of the
Mississippi Code Annotated, was within its discretion to dismiss Knichel's motion without conducting a
formal evidentiary hearing.
¶10. THE JUDGMENT OF THE WINSTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT DENYING POSTCONVICTION RELIEF IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO
WINSTON COUNTY.
McMILLIN, C.J., SOUTHWICK, P.J., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, IRVING, MYERS,
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.
