Broderick McCoy a/k/a Broderick Levar McCoy a/k/a Broderick L. McCoy v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2015-CP-00474-COA BRODERICK MCCOY A/K/A BRODERICK LEVAR MCCOY A/K/A BRODERICK L. MCCOY 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 03/04/2015 HON. FORREST A. JOHNSON JR. FRANKLIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT BRODERICK MCCOY (PRO SE) OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: ABBIE EASON KOONCE CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED MOTION FOR POSTCONVICTION RELIEF VACATED: 06/28/2016 BEFORE IRVING, P.J., FAIR AND WILSON, JJ. FAIR, J., FOR THE COURT: ¶1. Broderick McCoy pled guilty to sexual battery in 2006. He received a ten-year sentence, with credit for six months already served pending trial, and nine and one-half years to be served on post-release supervision. In 2010, McCoy was caught on his way to a scrap yard with six manhole covers that had recently been stolen from a construction site. He was arrested and indicted for grand larceny, and his suspended sentence was revoked. The grand larceny charge was subsequently dismissed. ¶2. Since then, McCoy has apparently attempted to file numerous challenges to the revocation.1 In the early instances, it appears he filed the variously styled petitions under the cause number of the 2010 grand larceny case. The instant appeal arises from a 2014 “Petition for Habeas Corpus”2 that, pursuant to McCoy’s specific instructions, was filed under the 2006 sexual battery cause number. After McCoy sought a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to rule on one of his petitions, the trial court entered an order finding that the 2014 petition was without merit and barred as a successive writ. McCoy has appealed from that judgment. On appeal, he takes issue with the content of the record, contends that his post-release supervision was illegally revoked, and argues that his sentence after revocation was illegal. ¶3. The Mississippi Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act abolishes and replaces “the common law writs relating to post-conviction collateral relief.” Miss. Code Ann. § 9939-3(1) (Rev. 2015). It provides “an exclusive and uniform procedure for the collateral review of convictions and sentences.” Id. (emphasis added). A post-conviction relief motion under the Act “shall be filed as an original civil action.” Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-7 (Rev. 2015). ¶4. While the circuit court could have ordered that McCoy’s petition be filed as an original civil action seeking post-conviction relief, it did not do so. Consequently, the circuit 1 We say “apparently” because they are referenced in the circuit court’s order, but despite being relied upon by the State in its brief, they have not been made a part of the record. 2 The full title of the filing is “Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus / Motion to Vacate Revocation of PRS / Motion to Clarify Sentence.” 2 court had no jurisdiction to enter an order adjudicating McCoy’s right to post-conviction relief. Latiker v. State, 991 So. 2d 1239, 1240-41 (¶¶7-8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). We vacate the circuit court’s judgment. ¶5. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FRANKLIN COUNTY IS VACATED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO FRANKLIN COUNTY. LEE, C.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, P.JJ., ISHEE, CARLTON, WILSON AND GREENLEE, JJ., CONCUR. BARNES, J., CONCURS IN PART AND IN THE RESULT WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION. JAMES, J., CONCURS IN PART WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION. 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.
