Brian Williams a/k/a Bryan Williams a/k/a Brian Andrew Williams v. State of Mississippi;

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

NO. 2019-CP-01652-COA

BRIAN WILLIAMS A/K/A BRYAN WILLIAMS APPELLANT
A/K/A BRIAN ANDREW WILLIAMS

v.

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/07/2019
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MARGARET CAREY-McCRAY
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: SUNFLOWER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: BRIAN WILLIAMS (PRO SE)
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: DARRELL CLAYTON BAUGHN
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 09/08/2020
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:

BEFORE WILSON, P.J., LAWRENCE AND McCARTY, JJ.

LAWRENCE, J., FOR THE COURT:

¶1. On October 26, 2009, Brian Williams pled guilty to armed robbery and aggravated

assault. The circuit court sentenced Williams to serve concurrent terms of eighteen years

for each count in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), with

thirteen years to serve, and placed him on five years of post-release supervision. Williams

contends that he is eligible for trusty-earned time pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated

Section 47-5-138.1 (Rev. 2015). He filed a request for relief through the MDOC

administrative remedy program. The MDOC denied his request, stating that Williams was

prohibited from receiving trusty-earned time based on his armed-robbery conviction.
Williams then filed a “Motion for Judicial Review” in the Sunflower County Circuit Court,

which also found him ineligible. Because Williams was convicted of armed robbery and

therefore barred from trusty-earned time under Mississippi Code Annotated sections

47-7-3(l)(c)(ii) (Rev. 2015), 47-5-138.1(2)(d) (Rev. 2015), 47-5-139(1)(e) (Rev. 2015), we

affirm.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

¶2. “The Court will not disturb a decision of an administrative agency, like the

Department [of Corrections], unless the decision is unsupported by substantial evidence, is

arbitrary or capricious, is beyond the agency’s scope or powers, or is a violation of the party’s

constitutional rights.” Thomas v. Miss. Dep’t of Corr., 248 So. 3d 786, 789 (¶8) (Miss.

2018).

DISCUSSION

¶3. Williams asserts that he is entitled to trusty-earned time credit. However, Mississippi

Code Annotated section 47-7-3(l)(c)(ii) explicitly states that a person convicted of armed

robbery can never be eligible for parole. Further, Williams may not accrue trusty-earned time

pursuant to sections 47-5-138.1(2)(d) and 47-5-139(1)(e). See Neal v. MDOC Records

Dep’t, 115 So. 3d 894, 895-96 (¶4) (Miss. Ct. App. 2013); accord Wells v. State, 936 So. 2d

479, 480 (¶5) (Miss. Ct. App. 2006); Bosarge v. State, 141 So. 3d 24, 27 (¶10) (Miss. Ct.

App. 2014). Therefore, the circuit court correctly dismissed Williams’s motion.

¶4. AFFIRMED.

BARNES, C.J., CARLTON AND WILSON, P.JJ., GREENLEE,
WESTBROOKS, McDONALD AND McCARTY, JJ., CONCUR.

2