Summary 2007 WY 164

Summary of Decision issued October 17, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Martinez v. State

Citation: 2007 WY 164

Docket Number: 06-238

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, the Honorable Peter G. Arnold, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Diane M. Lozano, Wyoming State Public Defender; Tina N. Kerin, Appellate Counsel, and Donna D. Domonkos, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Patrick J. Crank, Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; David L. Delicath, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

Issue: Whether Martinez’s appeal is barred by the doctrine of res judicata inasmuch as the parties, the subject matter, the issue and the parties capacities are the same in the present proceeding as they were in a previous proceeding.

Facts/Discussion: In two separate cases, Martinez was convicted of three felony drug charges, a domestic violence charge, property destruction, and criminal entry. At sentencing, he was credited for time previously served. Following sentencing, he filed motions challenging the legality of his sentences contending he should have been awarded more credit for time served. His motions were denied. Martinez appealed one of the denials and later voluntarily dismissed it. He later appealed again which was denied and he now appeals from that denial.
Standard of Review: Motions to correct an illegal sentence andother claims pursuant to W.R.Cr.P. 35(a) are subject to the principles of res judicata.
The Court examined four factors considering the identity in parties, identity in subject matter, the issues are the same and relate to the subject matter and the capacities of the persons are identical in reference to both eth subject matter and the issues between them. In the instant case, the parties, the subject matter, and the capacities of the parties have been the same in all motions previously filed in this matter.
Therefore the Court focused on whether Martinez raised or had the opportunity to raise the same issue in any previous proceeding. Martinez’s first motion to appeal filed February 2005 raised the issue whether his presentence confinement had been properly calculated and credited. The district court concluded that the proper credit had been awarded and that the sentence should not be disturbed. The Court noted that the principles articulated in Hamill and McDaniel were equally applicable to the instant case. Martinez could have and should have presented all theories of error in his first motion to correct an illegal sentence. The Court stated that subsequent challenges should have been barred by the doctrine of res judicata. The Court was not compelled to consider the merits of his claim.

Holding: The issue raised in this appeal was the same issue raised in all previous appeal proceedings: whether the credit for time served awarded was adequate. Wyoming law mandates that all efforts made after Martinez’s February 23, 2005 motion to correct was denied, including the present appeal, are barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Affirmed.

C.J. Voigt delivered the opinion.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/ypt2ox .