Court Opinion

ID: 9886997
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 16:59:14.831694+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:41:28.059420
License: Public Domain

COLEMAN, JUSTICE, SPECIALLY CONCURRING:
  

   ¶ 170. I concur with the reasoning and holding of the majority. I write separately to reiterate my position that, although our cases continue to refer to it as a procedural bar, the Legislature created substantive law when it enacted the three-year statute of limitations applicable to claims for post-conviction relief.
   
    Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-5
   
   (2) (Rev. 2015). Treating substantive law as procedural lessens the impetus upon the Court to enforce it, violates basic law of separation of powers, and contradicts prior precedent.
   
    See
   

    Williams v. State
   
   ,
   
    222 So.3d 265
   
   , 268-271 (¶¶ 8-15) (Miss. 2017) (Coleman, J., concurring). As I wrote in
   
    Williams
   
   , the Court should correct its mischaracterization of statutory bars as procedural ones.
  

   RANDOLPH, P.J., MAXWELL, BEAM, CHAMBERLIN AND ISHEE, JJ., JOIN THIS OPINION.