Summary 2008 WY 7

Summary of Decision issued January 25, 2008

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

Case Name: Palmer, Jr. v. State

Citation: 2008 WY 7

Docket Number: 06-273

Appeal from the District Court of Platte County, the Honorable John C. Brooks, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Lynn Boak, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

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

Facts/Discussion: Appellant was convicted of three counts of sexual assault. He claimed that trial counsel was ineffective for allowing him to plead guilty and that the district court should have granted a post-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The examination of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires a showing that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the performance prejudiced the defense. The standard for withdrawing a guilty plea is governed by W.R.Cr.P. 32(d).
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: The Court had to determine whether or not trial counsel’s actions were outside the range of professionally competent assistance and if the representation so undermined the adversarial process that the outcome could not be relied upon as having produced a just result. The Court applied the two-part test from Rutti. They considered whether or not the recommendation of a reasonably competent attorney regarding the plea would differ from that given and whether or not, absent the error, the outcome of the case would have been more advantageous than the terms of the plea agreement. The Court’s decision in Rutti emphasized that if a defendant did not assert a plausible reason why he would have forsaken the benefits of the plea agreement had counsel’s advice been different, the probable outcome of a trial provides an objective measure of the risk he faced.
Appellant further complained that he was urged to plead guilty based upon the fact that he had confessed and could be convicted on his confession alone. From the record, it was apparent that defense counsel did not force Appellant to plead guilty, nor did he threaten him or promise him anything.
Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea: Because Appellant moved to withdraw his guilty plea after sentence was imposed, he was required to demonstrate manifest injustice in order to succeed on his motion. The Court reviewed the record of what occurred at the re-arraignment when Appellant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty and stated that the record did not indicate that the plea or the factual basis for it was given other than voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently.

Holding: The record clearly showed that Appellant entered into the plea agreement fully informed of the charges to which he was pleading and aware of the maximum penalties. It was also clear that in exchange for the plea agreement that thirty-five other charges were dropped. Appellant did not meet his burden of showing the district court abused its discretion when it denied his motion. The Court stated that Appellant had not demonstrated that the district court’s ruling resulted in manifest injustice.

Affirmed.

J. Hill delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/3amywf .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]