Carr v. Mississippi
Annotate this CaseThe Court of Appeals affirmed Timothy Carr’s conviction and sentence and denied his motion for rehearing. Carr twice sought leave from the Supreme Court to file motions for post-conviction relief (PCR) (first in May 2008, then in September 2010). The Supreme Court denied both applications. Carr filed a third application, which a panel of the Supreme Court granted in 2013. Carr then filed his PCR motion, claiming that the habitual-offender portion of his sentence should have been vacated for two reasons: (1) because the Supreme Court’s intervening decision in "Gowdy v. Mississippi," (56 So. 3d 540 (Miss. 2010)) prohibited post-conviction indictment amendments; and (2) because the prosecution failed to reintroduce evidence of his prior convictions during the sentencing phase of his trial. Carr does not here contest the validity or admissibility of his prior convictions. Finding that Gowdy did not apply to his case, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals.
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.