Opinion
NO. 2014-CA-000936-MR
03-13-2015
WALTER RHODES APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE
BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT: Walter Rhodes, Pro Se Manchester, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Jack Conway Attorney General of Kentucky Thomas A. Van De Rostyne Assistant Attorney General Frankfort, Kentucky
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE CHARLES L. CUNNINGHAM JR., JUDGE
ACTION NO. 93-CR-002545
OPINION
AFFIRMING
BEFORE: DIXON, KRAMER, AND THOMPSON, JUDGES. DIXON, JUDGE: Walter Rhodes appeals from the Jefferson Circuit Court's order denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to RCr 11.42. Finding no error, we affirm.
On November 23, 1993, Rhodes pled guilty to charges of trafficking in a controlled substance (cocaine) and use or investment of drug-related income. The trial court subsequently imposed a sentence of eight years' imprisonment, which was probated for a period of five years. In November 1994, the court issued a bench warrant for Rhodes's arrest when he failed to appear at a probation revocation hearing. Rhodes was not apprehended until June 1999, and he was extradited from Texas to Kentucky. Rhodes was granted shock probation in March 2000; however, his probation was revoked nine months later.
The Kentucky Parole Board granted Rhodes parole in April 2002. Five months later, he was arrested on federal drug trafficking charges and ultimately received a sentence of twenty years' imprisonment. The Kentucky Parole Board issued a parole violation warrant due to Rhodes's federal conviction and filed a detainer against Rhodes with the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
The circuit court record reflects that, since January 2006, Rhodes has filed at least ten pro se motions to set aside his conviction. In April 2013, Rhodes filed a motion to vacate his guilty plea pursuant to RCr 11.42. Rhodes alleged his plea was invalid due to ineffective assistance of counsel and coercion by the prosecution. The circuit court summarily denied the motion, and this appeal followed.
In Gross v. Commonwealth, 648 S.W.2d 853, 857 (Ky. 1983), the Kentucky Supreme Court outlined the availability of post-conviction relief as follows:
[A] defendant is required to avail himself of RCr 11.42 while in custody under sentence or on probation, parole or conditional discharge, as to any ground of which he is aware, or should be aware, during the period when this remedy is available to him. Final disposition of that motion, or waiver of the opportunity to make it, shall conclude all issues that reasonably could have been presented in that proceeding. The language of RCr 11.42 forecloses the defendant from raising any questions under CR 60.02 which are 'issues that could reasonably have been presented' by RCr 11.42 proceedings.
We do not reach the merits of Rhodes's appeal because his motion, filed nearly twenty years after his conviction, was untimely and alleged claims that should have been raised in an earlier proceeding.
For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the order of the Jefferson Circuit Court.
ALL CONCUR. BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT: Walter Rhodes, Pro Se
Manchester, Kentucky
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Jack Conway
Attorney General of Kentucky
Thomas A. Van De Rostyne
Assistant Attorney General
Frankfort, Kentucky