Opinion ID: 1811102
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: did washington's attorney render ineffective assistance of counsel by misinforming washington of the mandatory sentencing requirements under which he was sentenced?

Text: Washington contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel during both the plea and sentencing phases. The claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is evaluated by the standards set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Strickland also applies to guilty pleas. Wilson, 577 So.2d at 396 (citing Schmitt v. State, 560 So.2d 148, 154 (Miss. 1990)). The two-pronged Strickland test is: (1) whether counsel's performance was deficient, and, if so, (2) whether the deficient performance was prejudicial to the defendant in the sense that our confidence in the correctness of the outcome is undermined. Neal v. State, 525 So.2d 1279, 1281 (Miss. 1987). The State concedes the first prong of the Strickland test by admitting in its brief that the performance by Washington's counsel was deficient. It is clear from the transcripts of the change of plea and sentencing hearings that Washington was misinformed as to the mandatory minimum sentence he would be required to serve before becoming eligible for parole. This Court has held that when a criminal defendant alleges that he pleaded guilty without being advised by his attorney as to the maximum and minimum sentences he is subject to, a question of fact arises as to the proficiency of the attorney's performance. Alexander, 605 So.2d at 1173 (citing Wilson, 577 So.2d at 396-397). Regarding the prejudicial prong of Strickland, this Court has held that a question of fact arises concerning whether or not the defendant had been prejudiced, that is, whether the defendant would have entered the guilty plea if he had been properly advised. Alexander, 605 So.2d at 1173. Washington has raised sufficient questions of fact on the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel. Therefore, we find that Washington is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on this matter as well.