Anthony Craig McDonald v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2008-CP-01467-COA
ANTHONY CRAIG MCDONALD
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
08/06/2008
HON. ROBERT P. KREBS
GEORGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
ANTHONY CRAIG MCDONALD (PRO SE)
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: LADONNA C. HOLLAND
CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION
RELIEF DENIED
AFFIRMED - 08/25/2009
BEFORE KING, C.J., GRIFFIS AND MAXWELL, JJ.
MAXWELL, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶ 1.
Anthony Craig McDonald, pro se, appeals the George County Circuit Court’s denial
of his petition for post-conviction relief. McDonald also argues that he has been improperly
denied credit for time served. Finding no error, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶2.
On April 23, 2007, McDonald pled guilty to grand larceny and burglary. The trial
court sentenced McDonald on the grand larceny charge to a term of ten years’ imprisonment
in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC) with credit for time
served. For the burglary charge, the trial court sentenced McDonald to a term of seven years
in the custody of the MDOC with credit for time served. The sentences were ordered to run
concurrently. The trial court suspended both sentences provided McDonald comply with
certain conditions during a five-year period of post-release supervision.
Among the
conditions of his post-conviction release, he was prohibited from committing further criminal
offenses, and he was directed to avoid injurious or vicious habits.
¶3.
On June 1, 2007, McDonald was charged with two counts of burglary. McDonald
also refused to take a drug test. On June 14, 2007, his post-conviction release was revoked,
and his original sentence of ten years’ imprisonment was reinstated. In March 2008,
McDonald filed a petition for post-conviction relief entitled “Petition to Clarify Sentence,”
which was denied by the trial court. Thereafter, he timely filed his notice of appeal.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶4.
“[T]his Court reviews a denial of a petition for post-conviction relief under an abuse
of discretion standard.” Brown v. State, 872 So. 2d 96, 98 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2004)
(quoting Mitchell v. State, 754 So. 2d 519, 521 (¶7) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999)). We will not
overturn a lower court's denial of post-conviction relief unless its factual findings are clearly
erroneous. McClinton v. State, 799 So. 2d 123, 126 (¶4) (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). However,
if questions of law are raised on appeal, our standard of review is de novo. Id.
DISCUSSION
¶5.
“[W]here there is a revocation of a suspended sentence or a revocation of probation,
courts . . . should adhere to the rule that an original sentence may be reinstated, but may not
2
be increased to the risk of the defendant.” Ethridge v. State, 800 So. 2d 1221, 1226 (¶17)
(Miss. Ct. App. 2001). Trial courts retain the power to revoke a suspended sentence and
impose the original terms. Johnson v. State, 925 So. 2d 86, 93 (¶12) (Miss. 2006) (quoting
Carter v. State, 754 So. 2d 1207, 1210-11 (Miss. 2000) (Mills, J., dissenting)). Thus, we find
the trial court did not err by reinstating McDonald’s original sentence of ten years’
imprisonment.
¶6.
While we agree McDonald should receive credit for the time he served prior to the
revocation of his supervised release, “a post-conviction relief pleading is not the proper
means to calculate and receive credit for the initial . . . time served.” Murphy v. State, 800
So. 2d 525, 527 (¶10) (Miss. Ct. App. 2001); see Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-23 (Rev. 2007).
McDonald “should send such requests to the proper authorities within the Mississippi
Department of Corrections[’] administrative system. If he is denied the proper relief, or
credit for time served, by the administrative system, he should then turn to the courts to seek
remedy.” Murphy, 800 So. 2d at 527-28 (¶10). Nevertheless, we note the record from the
MDOC provided by McDonald shows he has received credit for time served prior to the
period of post-release supervision.
¶7.
For the reasons stated herein, the trial court’s denial of McDonald’s petition for post-
conviction relief is affirmed.
¶8.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GEORGE COUNTY
DENYING THE PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF IS AFFIRMED.
ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO GEORGE COUNTY.
KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE,
ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ., CONCUR.
3
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.
