for the Court:

¶ 1. Albert Norwood appeals the circuit court’s denial of his request for documents from his guilty plea. Because his document request was not part of a direct appeal or motion for post-conviction relief, we lack jurisdiction. We thus dismiss.

Facts and Procedural History

¶2. On April 9, 2012, Norwood pled guilty to failing to re-register as a convicted sex offender. 1 The judge sentenced him to serve fours years, with credit for time served.

¶ 3. On October 15, 2013, Norwood mailed a letter to the circuit court asking for various documents from his failure-to-register case. The court treated Nor-wood’s letter as a motion and denied his request, noting he failed to show good cause for free documents. Norwood appealed. 2 '

Discussion

¶4. “Jurisdiction is a question of law[,] which this Court reviews de novo.” Bullock v. State, 1 So.3d 941, 942 (¶4) (Miss.Ct.App. 2009) (quoting Trustmark Nat’l Bank v. Johnson, 865 So.2d 1148, 1150 (¶ 8) (Miss. 2004)). There are two avenues of appeal for a criminal defendant — (1) a direct appeal from the conviction and (2) an appeal from a post-conviction relief (PCR) motion. Shanks v. State, 906 So.2d 760, 761 (¶3) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004). Norwood forfeited his right to a direct appeal when he pled guilty. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-35-101 (Supp. 2014). So *396 his only available avenue was to bring a PCR motion. Bullock, 1 So.3d at 943 (¶ 5). But he failed to do so.

¶ 5. What he was really doing here was fishing for documents. However, the Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act (UPCCRA) does not give a prisoner “the right to institute an independent, original action for a free transcript or other documents, and then if dissatisfied with the trial court’s ruling, to directly appeal that ruling to the appellate court as a separate and independent action.” Id. at (¶ 7).

¶ 6. But Norwood does have the option of requesting documents as part of a PCR motion. Id. at (¶ 6). If Norwood files a proper and timely PCR motion — and it withstands summary dismissal under Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-11(2) (Supp. 2014) — he then “may be entitled to trial transcripts or other relevant documents under the discovery provisions of [section] 99-39-15, upon good cause shown and in the discretion of the trial judge.” Bullock, 1 So.3d at 943 (¶ 6).

¶ 7. We thus dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

¶ 8. THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE DUE TO LACK OF JURISDICTION. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO HARRISON COUNTY.