The Rules are a Changing

Last Thursday, the Supreme Court made changes to two appellate rules.  Rule 22 has only a small change.  Rule 24 is now deleted.  I have no idea why we have now deleted Rule 24.  I guess the Supreme Court will no longer work in panels and the judges will not require an even division of the workload.  I hope I find out what’s behind this change.

RULE 22. APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION COLLATERAL RELIEF IN CRIMINAL CASES

(a) Filing of Applications. Applications for post-conviction collateral relief in criminal cases may be are governed by Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-1, et seq. (Suppl. 1994) as supplemented and modified by and this Rule 22. If any application fails to comply substantially with the statute, the clerk of the Supreme Court shall give written notice of the default, appraising the party of  the nature of the deficiency. If the deficiencies are not corrected within thirty days, the application may be dismissed. Successive applications for post-conviction relief which do not clearly demonstrate an exception to the successive writ bar of Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-27(9) may subject the filer to sanctions.

RULE 24. [OMITTED] COURT SITTING IN PANELS
(a) Panel Assignments: The Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will sit in panels of three justices. The Chief Justice shall preside over Panel A; the senior Presiding Justice shall preside over Panel B; and the junior Presiding Justice shall preside over Panel C. The two justices of each panel, other than the justices who preside, shall be rotated as often as administratively practical. Substitutions may be made as circumstances may require. Each panel and each justice shall, as far as practical, be assigned the same work load. 

(b) Consideration by Full Court: The Supreme Court. In the event the justices composing any panel shall differ as to the judgment to be rendered in any cause, or in the event any justice of any panel shall certify that in his opinion any decision already made or about to be made by any panel of the Court is in conflict with any prior decision of the full Court, or of any panel, or that the cause is of such importance that it should be considered by the full Court, the cause shall then be considered and adjudged by the full Court.

(c) Consideration by Panels or Full Court: Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals may sit en banc or may sit in panels of no fewer than three judges of the Court of Appeals.

Advisory Committee Historical Note
Effective January 1, 1995, Miss.R.App.P. 24 replaced Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 24, embracing proceedings in the Court of Appeals. 644-647 So.2d LVIII-LIX (West Miss.Cases 1994).

Comment
Rule 24 continues the established framework as to the panels in which the Supreme Court sits and its practice in hearing cases en banc.

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s