Alejandro Avila Salazar v. State of Tennessee
M2016-01336-CCA-R3-HC
| Tenn. Crim. App. | May 30, 2017Background
- Petitioner Alejandro Avila Salazar pled guilty in 2006 to second-degree murder and attempted aggravated rape, receiving an effective concurrent 40-year sentence.
- The guilty plea and judgment forms were silent as to the mandatory lifetime community supervision that would apply to an aggravated rape conviction.
- In 2015 Salazar filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in Wayne County, arguing the attempted aggravated rape sentence was illegal and that omission of lifetime supervision was a material, bargained-for element of his plea.
- The habeas court held an evidentiary hearing (May 2016) and ultimately dismissed the petition, finding Salazar failed to prove the illegal sentence was a material element of the plea.
- Salazar appealed; the Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed de novo and affirmed the dismissal, concluding the record did not show the lifetime supervision omission was a bargained-for element requiring withdrawal of the plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the attempted aggravated rape sentence is illegal for omitting mandatory lifetime community supervision | Salazar: omission makes the sentence illegal and was a material, bargained-for element of his plea | State: omission does not appear in the record as a bargained-for element; conviction remains valid and error (if any) is correctable | Court: Sentence omission rendered that part illegal but record did not show it was a material bargained-for element; conviction stands and remedy is sentence correction if needed |
| Whether habeas corpus is available to vacate the conviction based on the alleged illegal sentence | Salazar: habeas relief warranted because plea bargain included a 40-year deal without lifetime supervision | State: habeas relief is limited to void (not voidable) judgments; petitioner must prove illegality appears on face of record or that sentence was a material element | Court: Habeas relief denied — petitioner failed to carry burden to show illegal sentence was a material element; habeas not appropriate to undo conviction |
| Standard and burden for proving materiality of omitted plea term | Salazar: silence in record should not foreclose an evidentiary finding that omission was material | State: petitioner bears burden by preponderance; record silence weighs against finding materiality | Court: Agrees petitioner bears burden; factual inquiry is required and here petitioner failed to meet it |
| Appropriate remedy if illegal sentence exists but is not a bargained-for element | Salazar: seeks withdrawal of plea and relief from conviction | State: remedy is correction of sentence, not vacatur of conviction | Court: If sentence is illegal but not material to plea, remedy is correction of sentence (not withdrawal of plea) |
Key Cases Cited
- Summers v. Fortner, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007) (distinguishes when an illegal sentence renders a plea void and permits withdrawal)
- Summers v. Fortner, 267 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2008) (clarifies record-limited review and materiality inquiry for habeas relief)
- Taylor v. State, 995 S.W.2d 78 (Tenn. 1999) (habeas relief limited to claims showing illegality on face of judgment or record)
- Dykes v. Compton, 978 S.W.2d 528 (Tenn. 1998) (discusses when omission in plea advisement affects voluntariness and remedy)
- Archer v. State, 851 S.W.2d 157 (Tenn. 1993) (explains habeas corpus challenges to expired confinement and sentence issues)
- Potts v. State, 833 S.W.2d 60 (Tenn. 1992) (addresses facial invalidity of judgments and sentencing errors)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963) (cited regarding materiality principles in criminal proceedings)