Paul Taylor v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2007-CA-00213-COA
PAUL TAYLOR
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEE
12/27/2006
HON. ANDREW C. BAKER
TATE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
CHARLES E. MILLER
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS
CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
POST-CONVICTION RELIEF - DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
AFFIRMED - 6/10/2008
BEFORE LEE, P.J., BARNES AND ISHEE, JJ.
BARNES, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Paul Taylor pleaded guilty to three counts of sale of a controlled substance, morphine, in the
Circuit Court of Tate County. On June 10, 2005, the circuit court sentenced him to three concurrent
nineteen year sentences in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with nine years
suspended on each sentence. On November 20, 2006, Taylor, through his counsel, filed a motion
for post-conviction relief in the circuit court. That motion claimed, without specification, violation
of Taylor’s Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. It further stated that Taylor
“has prior mental problems” and that “a mental exam is required to determine whether the court has
jurisdiction to adjudicate guilt based on Taylor’s mental condition.” Taylor asks for a private doctor
of his choice to examine him for medical and mental disabilities. Taylor also requests to receive
proper treatment for his medical and mental condition.
¶2.
On December 29, 2006, the circuit court entered an order dismissing the motion for post-
conviction relief without prejudice because the motion did not contain either an affidavit of facts
within his personal knowledge to support his motion or a sworn oath by Taylor as required by
Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-9(1)(d) and (3) (Rev. 2000), respectively. For reasons
not disclosed in the record, Taylor, again through his counsel, chose to perfect a direct appeal rather
than correcting and refiling his motion for post-conviction relief in the circuit court.
¶3.
Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-9(4) (Rev. 2000) states that if the motion for post-
conviction collateral relief “does not substantially comply with the requirements of this section, it
shall be returned to the prisoner if a judge of the court so directs. . . .” While this statute does not
specify in what procedural device the motion shall be returned to the petitioner, we find no error in
the circuit court’s dismissing Taylor’s post-conviction relief petition without prejudice due to his
failure to provide the required oath or affidavit of facts to support his motion. Accordingly, we
affirm the circuit court’s dismissal of Taylor’s post-conviction relief motion without prejudice, so
he may refile a procedurally proper motion with the circuit court before the statute of limitations has
expired.1
¶4.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE TATE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT DISMISSING THE
MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF WITHOUT PREJUDICE IS AFFIRMED.
ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, ISHEE,
ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ., CONCUR.
1
For prisoners pleading guilty, a motion for post-conviction relief must be filed within three
years after entry of the judgment of conviction. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2) (Rev. 2007). Here,
the circuit court entered its sentencing order on June 28, 2005, leaving Taylor three years from that
date to file a procedurally proper motion for post-conviction relief with the circuit court.
2
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.
