Montenegro-Noyola v. State

Wyoming Supreme Court

Montenegro-Noyola v. State

2014 WY 164, 339 P.3d 518, 2014 Wyo. LEXIS 186, 2014 WL 7171968

CourtWyoming Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 17, 2014

DocketS-14-0214

StatusPublished

This text of 2014 WY 164 (Montenegro-Noyola v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Montenegro-Noyola v. State, 2014 WY 164, 339 P.3d 518, 2014 Wyo. LEXIS 186, 2014 WL 7171968 (Wyo. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

OrpEr Arrirminc tHE DistrrICT Court's "SENTENCE"

[¶ 1] This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant entered (1) an unconditional guilty plea to one count of felony possession of cocaine and (2) an unconditional "no contest" plea to one count of felony interference with a peace officer. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-1031(c)(ii) and § 6-5~204(b). This is Appellant's direct appeal from the resulting convictions. On September 30, 2014, Appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel filed a "Motion to Withdraw as Counsel," pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the "Anders brief" submitted by counsel, this Court, on October 21, 2014, entered its "Order Granting Permission for Court-Appointed Counsel to Withdraw." That Order notified Appellant the District Court's June 8, 2014, "Sentence" would be affirmed unless, on or before December 8, 2014, Appellant filed a brief that persuaded this Court the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. Now, taking note that Appellant, Jesus Montenegro-Noyola, has not filed a brief or other pleading within the time allotted, the Court finds that the district court's "Sentence" should be affirmed, with the following correction. Although Appellant was given an adequate firearms advisement (as required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-11-507(a)), neither the district court's "Judgment Upon Plea of Guilty" nor its "Sentence" includes a reference to the firearms advisement, contrary to W.R.Cr.P. 32b)(1)(E) and Starrett v. State, 2012 WY 133, ¶¶ 11-12, 19, 286 P.3d 1033, 1037-38, 1040 (Wyo.2012). It is, therefore,

[¶ 2] ORDERED that the district court's June 3, 2014, "Sentence" be, and the same hereby is, affirmed, subject to this correction: the district court shall enter an amended "Sentence," which shall include the firearms advisement required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-11-507(a) and- W.R.Cr.P. 82(b)(1)(E).

[¶ 3] DATED this 17th day of December, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

/s) E. JAMES BURKE Chief Justice

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OrpEr Arrirminc tHE DistrrICT Court's "SENTENCE"

[¶ 1] This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant entered (1) an unconditional guilty plea to one count of felony possession of cocaine and (2) an unconditional "no contest" plea to one count of felony interference with a peace officer. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-1031(c)(ii) and § 6-5~204(b). This is Appellant's direct appeal from the resulting convictions. On September 30, 2014, Appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel filed a "Motion to Withdraw as Counsel," pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Following a careful review of the record and the "Anders brief" submitted by counsel, this Court, on October 21, 2014, entered its "Order Granting Permission for Court-Appointed Counsel to Withdraw." That Order notified Appellant the District Court's June 8, 2014, "Sentence" would be affirmed unless, on or before December 8, 2014, Appellant filed a brief that persuaded this Court the captioned appeal is not wholly frivolous. Now, taking note that Appellant, Jesus Montenegro-Noyola, has not filed a brief or other pleading within the time allotted, the Court finds that the district court's "Sentence" should be affirmed, with the following correction. Although Appellant was given an adequate firearms advisement (as required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-11-507(a)), neither the district court's "Judgment Upon Plea of Guilty" nor its "Sentence" includes a reference to the firearms advisement, contrary to W.R.Cr.P. 32b)(1)(E) and Starrett v. State, 2012 WY 133, ¶¶ 11-12, 19, 286 P.3d 1033, 1037-38, 1040 (Wyo.2012). It is, therefore,

[¶ 2] ORDERED that the district court's June 3, 2014, "Sentence" be, and the same hereby is, affirmed, subject to this correction: the district court shall enter an amended "Sentence," which shall include the firearms advisement required by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-11-507(a) and- W.R.Cr.P. 82(b)(1)(E).

[¶ 3] DATED this 17th day of December, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

/s) E. JAMES BURKE Chief Justice

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2014 WY 164, 339 P.3d 518, 2014 Wyo. LEXIS 186, 2014 WL 7171968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montenegro-noyola-v-state-wyo-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack