Summary 2014 WY 45

Summary of Decision April 8, 2014

Justice Davis delivered the opinion of the Court. Affirmed.

Case Name: TY ROUSH v. THE STATE OF WYOMING

URL: http://www.courts.state.wy.us/Opinions.aspx

Docket Number: S-13-0111

Appeal from the District Court of Fremont County, the Honorable Norman E. Young, Judge

Representing Appellant: Office of the State Public Defender: Diane Lozano, State Public Defender; Tina N. Olson, Chief Appellate Counsel; Kirk A. Morgan, Senior Assistant Appellant Counsel.

Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Wyoming Attorney General; David L. Delicath, Deputy Attorney General; Jeffrey Pope, Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: April 8, 2014

Facts: Appellant Ty Roush entered a conditional guilty plea to a single count of third degree sexual assault, a violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-304(a)(i), reserving the right to challenge the district court’s conclusion that the State could prosecute him under that statute, which was repealed in 2007.

Issue: Did Wyoming’s general saving statute, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 8-1-107 (LexisNexis 2013), permit the State to initiate a third degree sexual assault prosecution in 2011 for conduct which preceded the repeal of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-304(a)(i) (LexisNexis 2005) (repealed 2007) by more than four years?

Holdings/Conclusion: The district court correctly concluded that the State could prosecute Roush under a provision of the third degree sexual assault statute which survived that provision’s 2007 repeal by virtue of Wyoming’s general saving statute. We consequently affirm the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss, and likewise affirm the judgment and sentence.

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

[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. You will also note, when you look at the opinion, that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quotation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance.]

Summary 2012 WY 67

Summary of Decision May 15, 2012


[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. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

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

Case Name: ALFRED LEE BALDES v. THE STATE OF WYOMING

Docket Number: S 11 0168

URL: http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=465619

Appeal from the District Court of Fremont County, Norman E. Young, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff/Defendant): David Hooper and Katherine A. Strike, of Hooper-Strike Law Offices, LLC, Lander, WY. Argument by Ms. Strike.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff/Defendant): Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. Amitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Stewart M. Young, Faculty Director, Prosecution Assistance Program; Joshua B. Taylor, Student Director; and Gregory Asay, Student Intern. Argument by Mr. Asay.

Date of Decision: May 15, 2012

Facts: Alfred Lee Baldes (Baldes) appeals his conviction of two counts of third-degree sexual assault, contending insufficiency of the evidence and improper admission of W.R.E. 404(b) evidence.

Issues: Whether the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to sustain Alfred Baldes’ conviction, specifically there was insufficient evidence to prove that Mr. Baldes was in a position of authority and that sexual contact occurred, as required by W.S. § 6-2-303(a)(vi) and W.S. § 6-2-304(a)(iii), respectively. Whether the trial court erred and abused its discretion when, following an improper Gleason analysis, it allowed the introduction of W.R.E. 404(b) evidence, specifically the testimony of J.G., which was ultimately not offered for its proper purpose by the State.

Holdings: The Court concluded that ample evidence was presented to prove that Baldes was in a position of authority over and had sexual contact with the victim, K.S. Furthermore, the district court followed a proper Gleason analysis of the proffered Rule 404(b) evidence, and the evidence served the purpose for which it was admitted. Affirmed.

Justice Hill delivered the opinion for the court.

Summary 2012 WY 61

Summary of Decision April 19, 2012

[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.  You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered.  When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number.  The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

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

Case Name: CHRISTINA CLARK v. THE STATE OF WYOMING

Docket Number: S 11 0123

URL: http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=465424

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

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff/Defendant):  Diane Lozano, State Public Defender, PDP; Tina N. Olson, Appellate Counsel; Kirk A. Morgan, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff/Defendant): Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; David L. Delicath, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Matthias L. Sayer, Assistant Attorney General

Date of Decision: April 19, 2012

Facts: Pursuant to a plea agreement, Christina Clark pled guilty to two counts of third degree sexual abuse of a minor.  The district court sentenced her to two concurrent terms of six to ten years in prison.  She appealed from the judgment and sentence, claiming her guilty pleas were not voluntary and she is entitled to a new sentencing hearing because the district court failed to mention probation in the written judgment and sentence.

Issues: Ms. Clark presented the following issues for this Court’s determination:  Did the district court err in accepting appellant’s guilty plea, as there was not an adequate foundation established to ensure that it was a voluntarily and informed decision?  Is reversal for a new sentencing required under the rule mandated in Trumbull v. State, 2009 WY 103, 214 P.3d 978 (Wyo. 2009)?  

The State asserted the district court properly accepted Ms. Clark’s guilty pleas after receiving sufficient information to ensure they were the product of a voluntary and informed decision.  The State also contended the district court appropriately considered probation as an alternative sentence as required by Trumbull and its failure to so state in the written judgment was merely a clerical error requiring remand to correct the omission.

Holdings: The Court affirmed Ms. Clark’s conviction and sentence and remanded to the district court for entry of an amended sentence in accordance with this opinion.

Chief Justice Kite delivered the opinion for the court.

Summary 2012 WY 56

Summary of Decision April 11, 2012


[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. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

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

Case Name: VICTOR EVERETT JACKSON v. THE STATE OF WYOMING

Docket Number: S-11-0145

URL: http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=465346

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, Honorable Thomas T.C. Campbell, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff/Defendant): Diane Lozano, State Public Defender, PDP; Tina N. Olson, Appellate Counsel; David E. Westling, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff/Defendant): Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Meri V. Geringer, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: April 11, 2012

Facts: Victor Everett Jackson pled guilty to one count of third degree sexual assault in exchange for the State’s agreement to request probation under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-13-301 (LexisNexis 2009). The district court placed him on supervised probation for five years. Six months later, the State filed a petition to revoke his probation but proceedings on the petition were delayed. A year later, Mr. Jackson filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea asserting that the victim of the assault had identified someone else as the perpetrator. The district court denied the motion and entered an order revoking probation. The district court entered judgment and imposed a sentence of four to five years. Mr. Jackson appealed, claiming the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

Issues: Mr. Jackson claims the district court abused its discretion and violated his right to due process when it denied his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The State responded that the district court properly exercised its discretion when it denied the motion.

Holdings: The Court found nothing to indicate the district court could not reasonably have concluded as it did. The Court affirmed the district court’s denial of Mr. Jackson’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

Chief Justice Kite delivered the opinion for the court.