Background
Roderikus Deshon Malone, also known as Rico D. Malone, was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder in 1995 and was paroled in 2017. In 2022, he pleaded guilty in Tunica County to felony possession of marijuana and received time served plus three years of post-release supervision. The Mississippi Parole Board then issued a warrant finding reasonable cause that the felony conviction violated his parole, and Malone was returned to custody on the murder conviction.
Malone filed a motion that the circuit court treated as a petition for post-conviction relief. He initially maintained that his incarceration stemmed from dismissed misdemeanor charges, but also argued that he could not be held on the 1995 conviction because it was entered under the name Rico D. Malone rather than Roderikus D. Malone. At a second hearing, a state fingerprint examiner testified that the 1995 and 2025 fingerprints came from the same person. Malone, his brother, and his cousin also acknowledged his 1995 incarceration for murder and related offenses.
The Court’s Holding
The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief. The circuit court’s factual finding that Rico D. Malone and Roderikus D. Malone were the same person was supported by fingerprint evidence, witness testimony, and Malone’s own admission.
The record also showed that Malone’s felony marijuana conviction—not the dismissed misdemeanor charges—was the basis for the Parole Board’s warrant and parole revocation. Malone offered no proof establishing error in the circuit court’s ruling, and the appellate court found no clear error in its factual findings.
Key Takeaways
- Fingerprint evidence supported the finding that Malone and the person convicted in 1995 under the name Rico D. Malone were the same individual.
- The felony marijuana conviction supplied the basis for the parole action.
- Arguments raised for the first time on appeal were procedurally barred.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the deference Mississippi appellate courts give to circuit-court fact findings in post-conviction proceedings. A petitioner challenging identity or the basis for parole revocation must overcome record evidence supporting the court’s findings.