RENDERED: OCTOBER 31, 2025; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2024-CA-0292-MR
MONTEZ BENJAMIN APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM HICKMAN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE TIMOTHY A. LANGFORD, JUDGE ACTION NO. 22-CR-00016
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE
AND
NO. 2024-CA-0306-MR
APPEAL FROM HICKMAN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE TIMOTHY A. LANGFORD, JUDGE ACTION NO. 22-CR-00002
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE OPINION AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: CALDWELL, EASTON, AND L. JONES, JUDGES.
JONES, L., JUDGE: Montez Benjamin brings Appeal No. 2024-CA-0292-MR
from a February 17, 2024 Judgment and Sentence on a Plea of Guilty and brings
Appeal No. 2024-CA-0306-MR from a February 16, 2024 Judgment and Sentence
on a Plea of Guilty both entered in the Hickman Circuit Court. We affirm.
On January 20, 2022, Benjamin was indicted by a Hickman County
Grand Jury (Case No. 22-CR-00002; Appeal No. 2024-CA-0306-MR) upon the
following counts: one count of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia; one count of
Possession of a Controlled Substance, First Degree; one count of Operating a
Motor Vehicle Under the Influence, Fourth Offense; one count of Driving on DUI
Suspended License, Second Offense; one count of Trafficking in Marijuana, less
than 8 ounces, First Offense; and Persistent Felony Offender (PFO), First Degree.
Then, on May 19, 2022, Benjamin was indicted (Case No. 22-CR-00016; Appeal
No. 2024-CA-0292-MR) upon the following counts: one count of Trafficking in a
Controlled Substance, First Degree, Second or Greater Offense; one count of
Possession of a Controlled Substance, First Degree, Methamphetamine; one count
of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia; and PFO, First Degree.
-2- On September 15, 2022, Benjamin appeared before the court with
counsel and entered pleas of guilty in both cases (Case Nos. 22-CR-00002 and 22-
CR-00016). Pursuant to the Commonwealth’s offer in Case No.22-CR-00002,
Benjamin pleaded guilty to the indicted counts, except the PFO count, which was
dismissed, in exchange for a recommended total combined sentence of seven
years’ imprisonment. Pursuant to the Commonwealth’s offer in Case No. 22-CR-
00016, Benjamin pleaded guilty to the indicted counts, except the PFO count,
which was dismissed, in exchange for a recommended total combined sentence of
nine-and-one-half years’ imprisonment. The recommendation provided the
sentences were to run consecutively for a total of sixteen-and-one half years. The
circuit court accepted Benjamin’s guilty pleas and set final sentencing for
November 17, 2022.
On January 25, 2023, Benjamin filed a Motion to Withdraw Guilty
Plea in both cases (Case Nos. 22-CR-00002 and 22-CR-00016). On August 3,
2023, the circuit court entered Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Orders
denying Benjamin’s motions to withdraw his guilty pleas. Thereafter, on February
16, 2024, a Judgment and Sentence on Plea of Guilty was entered in Case No. 22-
CR-00002, and on February 17, 2024, a Judgment and Sentence on Plea of Guilty
was likewise entered in Case No. 22-CR-00016. Pursuant thereto, Benjamin was
sentenced to a combined total sentence of sixteen-and-one-half years’
-3- imprisonment, consistent with the Commonwealth’s recommendation. These
appeals follow.
Benjamin contends the circuit court erred by denying his motions to
withdraw his guilty pleas. More specifically, Benjamin asserts his guilty pleas
were not entered into knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily due to
misinformation provided by a member of his defense team (an investigator with
the Department of Public Advocacy) and due to his medical condition.1
The withdrawal of a guilty plea is governed by RCr2 8.10, which
provides, in relevant part that “[a]t any time before judgment the court may permit
the plea of guilty . . . to be withdrawn[.]” And, in Williams v. Commonwealth, 229
S.W.3d 49, 50-51 (Ky. 2007), our Supreme Court set forth the following regarding
withdrawal of a previously entered guilty plea:
To be valid, a plea must be knowing, intelligent and voluntary, Haight v. Commonwealth, 760 S.W.2d 84, 88 (Ky. 1988), and a trial court shall not accept a plea without first determining that it is made voluntarily with understanding of the nature of the charge. RCr 8.08. RCr 8.10 provides that a guilty plea may be withdrawn with permission of the court before judgment. A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty under RCr 8.10 is generally addressed to the sound discretion of the court; however, where it is alleged that the plea was entered involuntarily the defendant is entitled to a hearing on the motion. Edmonds v. Commonwealth, 189 S.W.3d 558, 566 (Ky. 2006). If the plea was involuntary, the motion to
1 Benjamin apparently suffers from congestive heart failure. 2 Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure.
-4- withdraw it must be granted; if it was voluntary, the trial court may, within its discretion, either grant or deny the motion. Rigdon v. Commonwealth, 144 S.W.3d 283, 288 (Ky. App. 2004). A trial court abuses its discretion when it renders a decision which is arbitrary, unreasonable, unfair or unsupported by legal principles. Edmonds, 189 S.W.3d at 570. The inquiry into the circumstances of the plea as it concerns voluntariness is inherently fact-sensitive. Id. at 566. Accordingly, the trial court’s determination as to whether the plea was voluntarily entered is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. Id.
In the case sub judice, Benjamin engaged in a sufficient plea colloquy
with the circuit court. During the plea colloquy, Benjamin acknowledged he had
not been coerced into pleading guilty and he had not been promised anything in
exchange for his guilty plea. Benjamin maintained his guilty plea was entered into
voluntarily, and he had been given the time necessary to consider the plea offer.
Benjamin stated he had previously pleaded guilty to other crimes; thus, he had
experience navigating the plea process. Benjamin also acknowledged that despite
having knowledge of his medical issues, he did not mention these issues to the
circuit court during the plea colloquy.
In its August 3, 2023 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and
Orders denying Benjamin’s motions to withdraw his guilty pleas, the circuit court
found that Benjamin’s guilty pleas were made knowingly, intelligently, and
voluntarily and that there was no evidence of coercion or undue influence. The
circuit court specifically reasoned:
-5- 11. This Court held an evidentiary hearing on the 1st day of August, 2023, and [Benjamin] testified that he only entered his guilty pleas in the Hickman [County] Cases on the advice of counsel and an individual employed by the Department of Public Advocacy as an investigator. He further stated that counsel and the investigator advised him that he could withdraw his guilty plea after its submission to the Court, and that entering a plea of guilty was the most expedient way for [Benjamin] to acquire higher-quality healthcare. These allegations were not substantiated by any other testimony.
12.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
RENDERED: OCTOBER 31, 2025; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2024-CA-0292-MR
MONTEZ BENJAMIN APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM HICKMAN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE TIMOTHY A. LANGFORD, JUDGE ACTION NO. 22-CR-00016
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE
AND
NO. 2024-CA-0306-MR
APPEAL FROM HICKMAN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE TIMOTHY A. LANGFORD, JUDGE ACTION NO. 22-CR-00002
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE OPINION AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: CALDWELL, EASTON, AND L. JONES, JUDGES.
JONES, L., JUDGE: Montez Benjamin brings Appeal No. 2024-CA-0292-MR
from a February 17, 2024 Judgment and Sentence on a Plea of Guilty and brings
Appeal No. 2024-CA-0306-MR from a February 16, 2024 Judgment and Sentence
on a Plea of Guilty both entered in the Hickman Circuit Court. We affirm.
On January 20, 2022, Benjamin was indicted by a Hickman County
Grand Jury (Case No. 22-CR-00002; Appeal No. 2024-CA-0306-MR) upon the
following counts: one count of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia; one count of
Possession of a Controlled Substance, First Degree; one count of Operating a
Motor Vehicle Under the Influence, Fourth Offense; one count of Driving on DUI
Suspended License, Second Offense; one count of Trafficking in Marijuana, less
than 8 ounces, First Offense; and Persistent Felony Offender (PFO), First Degree.
Then, on May 19, 2022, Benjamin was indicted (Case No. 22-CR-00016; Appeal
No. 2024-CA-0292-MR) upon the following counts: one count of Trafficking in a
Controlled Substance, First Degree, Second or Greater Offense; one count of
Possession of a Controlled Substance, First Degree, Methamphetamine; one count
of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia; and PFO, First Degree.
-2- On September 15, 2022, Benjamin appeared before the court with
counsel and entered pleas of guilty in both cases (Case Nos. 22-CR-00002 and 22-
CR-00016). Pursuant to the Commonwealth’s offer in Case No.22-CR-00002,
Benjamin pleaded guilty to the indicted counts, except the PFO count, which was
dismissed, in exchange for a recommended total combined sentence of seven
years’ imprisonment. Pursuant to the Commonwealth’s offer in Case No. 22-CR-
00016, Benjamin pleaded guilty to the indicted counts, except the PFO count,
which was dismissed, in exchange for a recommended total combined sentence of
nine-and-one-half years’ imprisonment. The recommendation provided the
sentences were to run consecutively for a total of sixteen-and-one half years. The
circuit court accepted Benjamin’s guilty pleas and set final sentencing for
November 17, 2022.
On January 25, 2023, Benjamin filed a Motion to Withdraw Guilty
Plea in both cases (Case Nos. 22-CR-00002 and 22-CR-00016). On August 3,
2023, the circuit court entered Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Orders
denying Benjamin’s motions to withdraw his guilty pleas. Thereafter, on February
16, 2024, a Judgment and Sentence on Plea of Guilty was entered in Case No. 22-
CR-00002, and on February 17, 2024, a Judgment and Sentence on Plea of Guilty
was likewise entered in Case No. 22-CR-00016. Pursuant thereto, Benjamin was
sentenced to a combined total sentence of sixteen-and-one-half years’
-3- imprisonment, consistent with the Commonwealth’s recommendation. These
appeals follow.
Benjamin contends the circuit court erred by denying his motions to
withdraw his guilty pleas. More specifically, Benjamin asserts his guilty pleas
were not entered into knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily due to
misinformation provided by a member of his defense team (an investigator with
the Department of Public Advocacy) and due to his medical condition.1
The withdrawal of a guilty plea is governed by RCr2 8.10, which
provides, in relevant part that “[a]t any time before judgment the court may permit
the plea of guilty . . . to be withdrawn[.]” And, in Williams v. Commonwealth, 229
S.W.3d 49, 50-51 (Ky. 2007), our Supreme Court set forth the following regarding
withdrawal of a previously entered guilty plea:
To be valid, a plea must be knowing, intelligent and voluntary, Haight v. Commonwealth, 760 S.W.2d 84, 88 (Ky. 1988), and a trial court shall not accept a plea without first determining that it is made voluntarily with understanding of the nature of the charge. RCr 8.08. RCr 8.10 provides that a guilty plea may be withdrawn with permission of the court before judgment. A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty under RCr 8.10 is generally addressed to the sound discretion of the court; however, where it is alleged that the plea was entered involuntarily the defendant is entitled to a hearing on the motion. Edmonds v. Commonwealth, 189 S.W.3d 558, 566 (Ky. 2006). If the plea was involuntary, the motion to
1 Benjamin apparently suffers from congestive heart failure. 2 Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure.
-4- withdraw it must be granted; if it was voluntary, the trial court may, within its discretion, either grant or deny the motion. Rigdon v. Commonwealth, 144 S.W.3d 283, 288 (Ky. App. 2004). A trial court abuses its discretion when it renders a decision which is arbitrary, unreasonable, unfair or unsupported by legal principles. Edmonds, 189 S.W.3d at 570. The inquiry into the circumstances of the plea as it concerns voluntariness is inherently fact-sensitive. Id. at 566. Accordingly, the trial court’s determination as to whether the plea was voluntarily entered is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. Id.
In the case sub judice, Benjamin engaged in a sufficient plea colloquy
with the circuit court. During the plea colloquy, Benjamin acknowledged he had
not been coerced into pleading guilty and he had not been promised anything in
exchange for his guilty plea. Benjamin maintained his guilty plea was entered into
voluntarily, and he had been given the time necessary to consider the plea offer.
Benjamin stated he had previously pleaded guilty to other crimes; thus, he had
experience navigating the plea process. Benjamin also acknowledged that despite
having knowledge of his medical issues, he did not mention these issues to the
circuit court during the plea colloquy.
In its August 3, 2023 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and
Orders denying Benjamin’s motions to withdraw his guilty pleas, the circuit court
found that Benjamin’s guilty pleas were made knowingly, intelligently, and
voluntarily and that there was no evidence of coercion or undue influence. The
circuit court specifically reasoned:
-5- 11. This Court held an evidentiary hearing on the 1st day of August, 2023, and [Benjamin] testified that he only entered his guilty pleas in the Hickman [County] Cases on the advice of counsel and an individual employed by the Department of Public Advocacy as an investigator. He further stated that counsel and the investigator advised him that he could withdraw his guilty plea after its submission to the Court, and that entering a plea of guilty was the most expedient way for [Benjamin] to acquire higher-quality healthcare. These allegations were not substantiated by any other testimony.
12. [Benjamin] stated in his testimony that he was diagnosed with congestive heart failure on the 22nd day of September, 2022, however the Court noted a furlough order entered by this Court on the 26th day of September, 2022. He was not in state custody at that time, and the furlough order noted that the Ballard County Jail was meeting his medical needs by transporting him to Western Baptist Hospital.
13. The Court took the opportunity to review the record of the entry of [Benjamin’s] plea from the 15th day of September, 2022. At no time did [Benjamin] give any indication of health problems or other coercion to this Court. The Court gave [Benjamin] two opportunities to further discuss the plea with his attorneys during that time. Both were rejected by [Benjamin] at time stamp on the tape of 10:14:23 and 10:17:24.
R at 89-90.
Based upon our review of the record, and the circuit court’s analysis
of same, we cannot conclude that the circuit court’s finding that the plea agreement
was entered into knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily was clearly erroneous as
there was substantial evidence to support the circuit court’s finding. And, the
-6- circuit court did not abuse its discretion by denying Benjamin’s motions to
withdraw his guilty pleas.
We view any remaining contentions of error as moot or without merit.
We affirm the circuit court’s August 3, 2023 Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law, and Orders denying Benjamin’s motions to withdraw his
guilty pleas.
ALL CONCUR.
BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT: BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:
Molly Mattingly Russell Coleman Assistant Public Advocate Attorney General of Kentucky Frankfort, Kentucky Christopher Henry Assistant Solicitor General Frankfort, Kentucky
-7-