Abdoulie Njie v. State of Rhode Island
156 A.3d 429
R.I.2017Background
- In 2011 Njie was indicted on four counts: two first-degree sexual assaults (counts 1–2), one second-degree sexual assault (count 3), and witness intimidation (count 4).
- On December 4, 2012, Njie pled nolo contendere to counts 3 and 4; the State dismissed counts 1 and 2 in exchange. He was sentenced to 15 years (12 to serve) on count 3 and a concurrent/probationary sentence on count 4.
- One week later the State moved under Rule 35 to correct count 4’s sentence, acknowledging count 4 was a misdemeanor (max 1 year), not a felony (max 5 years); the court modified the plea form and sentence with Njie present and Njie initialed the modification.
- Njie filed a postconviction application asserting ineffective assistance of counsel and that his plea was not knowing and voluntary because he was misinformed about the charges and consequences.
- The Superior Court (the same justice who took the plea) held a hearing, found the plea colloquy was thorough, Njie acknowledged understanding the change, and denied postconviction relief; Njie appealed.
- The Supreme Court affirmed, holding Njie failed to show deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland and that the plea remained knowing, intelligent, and voluntary despite the later sentencing correction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Njie: counsel misstated charges/consequences; plea uninformed, so counsel deficient and prejudicial | State: record shows counsel obtained dismissal of two first-degree counts and a favorable sentence; no evidence Njie would have gone to trial | Court: No deficient performance shown; no prejudice—counsel secured a much shorter sentence, so Njie’s burden to show prejudice is almost insurmountable; claim fails |
| Knowing and voluntary plea | Njie: plea was not knowing/voluntary because he was misinformed as to the proper charges (count 4 felony vs misdemeanor) | State: plea colloquy and post-plea modification show Njie understood charges and consequences; Njie acquiesced and initialed amendment | Court: Plea colloquy adequate under Rule 11; post-plea sentence correction was a permissible extension, not a vacating of plea; plea remained knowing and voluntary |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Perkins v. State, 78 A.3d 764 (R.I. 2013) (applying Strickland in plea context; high burden to show prejudice when counsel secures shorter sentence)
- Neufville v. State, 13 A.3d 607 (R.I. 2011) (in plea context, applicant must show he would have insisted on trial and trial outcome would differ)
- Armenakes v. State, 821 A.2d 239 (R.I. 2003) (post-plea sentencing corrections before the same justice can be treated as an extension of the plea session, not a new plea)