dismissal when “it plainly appears from the face of the motion, any annexed exhibits and the prior proceedings in the case that the movant is not entitled to any relief’). Conwill timely appealed the judgment dismissing his PCR motion. Discussion ¶ 14. The involved background facts and procedural history, once sorted, lead to a straightforward conclusion: Conwill is not entitled to an out-of-time appeal. I. Time Allowed for Giving a Notice of Appeal ¶ 15. To prove the right to an out-of-time appeal, Conwil e of appeal was filed within the thirty days following the sentencing order. ¶ 16. In his PCR motion, Conwill does not challenge the waiver he pronounced to the court in May 2008, at his burglary sentencing hearing. See Davis v. State, 36 So.3d 456, 460 (¶ 13) (Miss.Ct.App.2010) (<HOLDING>). Instead, he asserts that, because he later
holding that one must voluntarily and intelligently waive the right to counsel holding that an accused may voluntarily waive his or her right of appeal so long as the waiver is informed and voluntary quoting 24 cjs criminal law  2349 2006 holding that under the sixth amendment a criminal defendant may waive his right to counsel if that waiver is knowing intelligent and voluntary recognizing that courts will enforce waiver of appeal rights when waiver is knowing and voluntary holding that an appeal waiver is valid when it is entered into knowingly and voluntarily