Opinion ID: 1759329
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: All essential elements of a contract are present.

Text: The agreement of the parties embraced within the WAIVER OF PAROLE RIGHTS includes all the essential elements necessary for the formation of a valid contract. That plea bargain agreement includes: (1) two or more contracting parties; (2) consideration; (3) an agreement that is sufficiently definite; (4) parties with the legal capacity to make a contract; (5) mutual assent; and (6) no legal prohibition precluding contract formation. These elements are briefly considered infra. PARTIES: In the third paragraph of the WAIVER OF PAROLE, Lanier states under oath that he, as promisor, is agreeing with his attorneys, the State of Mississippi, and the Court as promisees. CONSIDERATION: Paragraph number three of the WAIVER OF PAROLE declares that the consideration given by the State to Lanier is the State's agreement to forebear seeking the death penalty against Lanier. Paragraphs number three, six, and seven state that the consideration given by Lanier in exchange for the State's consideration is: (a) a waiver of any and all present or future rights to parole; (b) waiver of all privileges for parole; and (c) waiver of all rights to make application for parole at any time in the future. DEFINITENESS: The terms of the agreement are not ambiguous. In paragraph number four, Lanier plainly declares that he has been advised of his future eligibility for parole pursuant to MISS. CODE ANN. § 47-7-17 (1972), as amended, by which he would be eligible for parole after serving ten years of his sentence of life imprisonment. It is abundantly clear throughout the text of the contract that Lanier is exchanging that future parole eligibility for the promise by the State not to seek the death penalty. CAPACITY TO CONTRACT: Without digressing into the authority to contract, let it suffice to say that the State of Mississippi enters into numerous plea bargain agreements on a daily basis. Paragraph number nine of the plea bargain agreement relates the fact that Lanier has been found competent to enter into the waiver by Circuit Judge Robert W. Bailey. Further, although some of the rights of a person are terminated upon conviction of a felony, the power to contract is not one of them. Lanier's status as a convict at the time of entering into the contract does not mean that he did not have the legal capacity to contract. As previously stated by this Court, [p]ersons who have been convicted of crimes do not shed all of their legal rights at the jailhouse door. McFadden v. State, 542 So.2d 871, 875 (Miss. 1989). MUTUAL ASSENT: Lanier and the State of Mississippi both expressed commitments to each other to act or refrain from acting in a certain way in the future, therefore, they have expressed their mutual assent concerning such actions. LEGALITY OF FORMATION: Since Lanier had already been convicted, and that conviction was upheld on appeal, Lanier v. State, 533 So.2d 473 (Miss. 1988), when he bargained with the State, the only thing of any value which Lanier could exchange with the State was his potential future freedom from imprisonment which might be obtained through application for parole. In exchange for Lanier's promise not to make an application for parole in the future, the State of Mississippi agreed to forebear exercising its right to seek the death penalty and to settle for a punishment of life imprisonment without parole. Put another way, the subject matter of the consideration offered by Lanier was his right to apply for parole in the future and any parole which could result therefrom. Although not expressly provided by statute, inasmuch as the right to apply for parole belongs to the individual, it may be used in any way not expressly prohibited by law, including waiver by plea bargain agreement. Since there is no explicit prohibition against making an agreement with a convict concerning his right to apply for parole, the WAIVER OF PAROLE RIGHTS is a valid plea bargain agreement in which Lanier voluntarily supplemented or enhanced his sentence of life imprisonment.