State v. Evans

234 N.W.2d 199, 194 Neb. 559, 1975 Neb. LEXIS 857
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 23, 1975
Docket39971
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 234 N.W.2d 199 (State v. Evans) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Evans, 234 N.W.2d 199, 194 Neb. 559, 1975 Neb. LEXIS 857 (Neb. 1975).

Opinions

Spencer, J.

This is an appeal from a burglary conviction on a nolo contendere plea entered pursuant to a plea bargain. The county attorney agreed to recommend a 6-month county jail sentence. Appellant-defendant received a 2 to 4 year term in the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex. His motion to withdraw his plea was overruled. Defendant alleges the court, in overruling his motion to withdraw his plea, abused its discretion, violated his right to the equal protection of the laws, and denied the due process of law guaranteed by the United States Constitution. We affirm.

When defendant entered his plea the trial court inquired whether there had been any plea bargaining. Counsel for defendant informed the court there had, and explained the agreement to the court. He then requested that the plea be entered with leave to withdraw it if the court chose not to honor the county attorney’s recommendation of a county jail sentence. The court advised defendant and his counsel it would not be bound by any recommendations. It further advised defendant any plea made would be binding and if that was not the understanding of defendant and his counsel there should be no further proceedings on the plea. Defendant was then asked by his counsel if this was agreeable to him and he replied in the affirmative. The court then stated: “The only position I am taking, Mr. Evans, is that, as the Court, I am not going to be bound by such a recommendation. You are either guilty of a charge, or you are not. I am not saying it won’t be considered, because it will. Certainly the recommendation of the County Attorney will be considered, as will the presentence investigation and anything else that is brought to the Court, either by your lawyer, or you. [561]*561Is that your understanding, Mr. Evans?” Defendant answered affirmatively.

At the sentencing the judge reviewed the defendant’s presentence investigation with him. He asked the defendant if it was about right, and the defendant replied in the affirmative. The judge then stated the probation officer had recommended incarceration. He advised defendant he had taken note of the county attorney’s recommendation but chose not to follow it. Defendant, who had a previous felony record, was then sentenced to 2 to 4 years in the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex.

Defendant, in his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, alleged he would not have pled guilty except for the plea bargain and that he entered his plea in reliance upon the plea bargain being honored. He further alleged that if it had not been for his prior felony conviction and a juvenile record, he would have sought a different plea bargain rather than one which involved county jail time.

This is not a situation where a plea bargain has been violated. The county attorney made the recommendation called for by the agreement. The judge declined to accept the recommendation. At the time of the plea defendant’s counsel asked the trial court if the defendant would be permitted to withdraw his plea if the court chose not to honor the county attorney’s recommendation. The court advised the parties such procedure was not acceptable to him and that any plea entered would be binding on the defendant. After being so advised, the defendant still chose to enter his plea. This was the proper procedure. A trial judge should not enter into any agreement that the defendant will be permitted to withdraw his plea if he does not accept the county attorney’s recommendation on sentence.

As defendant’s counsel suggests, in State v. Turner (1971), 186 Neb. 424, 183 N. W. 2d 763, we enunciated the following rule concerning pleas of guilty: “* * * [562]*562the Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty promulgated by the American Bar Association outline what should be the minimum procedure in the taking of such pleas.” We have consistently adhered to this position and have set aside pleas where the ABA Standards were not followed.

The ABA Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty cover the withdrawal of pleas. Section 2.1 of the Pleas of Guilty is as follows:

“2.1 Plea withdrawal.
“(a) The court should allow the defendant to withdraw his plea of guilty or nolo contendere whenever the defendant, upon a timely motion for withdrawal, proves that withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.
“(i) A motion for withdrawal is timely if made with due diligence, considering the nature of the allegations therein, and is not necessarily barred because made subsequent to judgment or sentence.
“(ii) Withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice whenever the defendant proves that:
“(1) he was denied the effective assistance of counsel guaranteed to him by constitution, statute, or rule;
“(2) the plea was not entered or ratified by the defendant or a person authorized to so act in his behalf;
“(3) the plea was involuntary, or was entered without knowledge of the charge or that the sentence actually imposed could be imposed; or
“(4) he did not receive the charge or sentence concessions contemplated by the plea agreement and the prosecuting attorney failed to seek or not to oppose these concessions as promised in the plea agreement.
“(iii) The defendant may move for withdrawal of [563]*563his plea without alleging that he is innocent of the charge to which the plea has been entered.
“(b) In the absence of a showing that withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice, a defendant may not withdraw his plea of guilty or nolo contendere as a matter of right once the plea lias been accepted by the court. Before sentence, the court in its discretion may allow the defendant to withdraw his plea for any fair and just reason unless the prosecution has been substantially prejudiced by reliance upon the defendant’s plea.”

It is evident that the defendant did not bring himself within the manifest injustice standard. The only reason we can deduce from his motion is that he expected the recommendation of the county attorney would be honored. He was specifically advised by the trial court that it would not be bound by the recommendation and that if he did plead guilty he would not be permitted to withdraw the plea.

The procedure followed herein comported fully with our interpretation of the ABA Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty. Section 3.3 of the standards sets out the responsibilities of the trial judge. That section is as follows:

“3.3 Responsibilities of the trial judge.
“(a) The trial judge should not participate in plea discussions.
“(b) If a tentative plea agreement has been reached which contemplates entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere in the expectation that other charges before that court will be dismissed or that sentence concessions will be granted, upon request of the parties the trial judge may permit the disclosure to him of the tentative agreement and the reasons therefor in advance of the time for tender of the plea. He may then indicate to the prosecuting attorney and defense counsel whether he will concur in the proposed disposition if the information in the presentence report is consistent with the rep[564]*564resentations made to him.

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

Related

State v. Gnewuch
316 Neb. 47 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2024)
State v. Boone
992 N.W.2d 451 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2023)
State v. Lotter
586 N.W.2d 591 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1998)
State v. Minshall
416 N.W.2d 585 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1987)
State v. Irish
394 N.W.2d 879 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1986)
State v. Dixon
389 N.W.2d 307 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1986)
State v. Holtan
344 N.W.2d 661 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1984)
State v. Hill
285 N.W.2d 229 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1979)
Burden v. State
592 P.2d 451 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1979)
State v. Miller
275 N.W.2d 614 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1979)
State v. Simpson
265 N.W.2d 681 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1978)
State v. Alegria
255 N.W.2d 419 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1977)
State v. Kluge
251 N.W.2d 737 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1977)
State v. Stewart
250 N.W.2d 849 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1977)
State v. Blankenbaker
248 N.W.2d 773 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1977)
State v. McConkey
247 N.W.2d 687 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1976)
State v. Evans
234 N.W.2d 199 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
234 N.W.2d 199, 194 Neb. 559, 1975 Neb. LEXIS 857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-evans-neb-1975.