Bonney v. State, 2011 WY 51

Bonney pleaded guilty to two counts of second degree sexual assault under Wyo. Stat. § 6-2-303(a)(v) and was charged with other counts; he admitted acts involving two victims ages around eight.
Plea agreement provided for consecutive prison terms of 15 to 20 years, with the second suspended to 15 years of supervised probation.
Bonney was sentenced on February 26, 2009, to the agreed consecutive terms with the second sentence suspended.
Bonney pursued post-conviction relief in June 2009 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, which the district court denied after an evidentiary hearing.
Bonney then moved under W.R.Cr.P. 35(b) for a sentence reduction; the district court denied the motion in April 2010 after considering the motion and record.
The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion and holding the court properly weighed the facts and policy considerations favoring finality and victims’ interests.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the district court abuse its discretion denying Rule 35(b) relief?	Bonney contends the court was precluded by the plea and ignored his evidence.	State argues the court properly exercised discretion and considered the motion and record.	No abuse of discretion; relief denied affirmed.

LeGarda-Cornelio v. State, 218 P.3d 968 (Wyoming 2009) (broad discretion in sentence reduction; standard of review applied by appellate court)
Hodgins v. State, 1 P.3d 1259 (Wyoming 2000) (deference to trial court’s sentencing decisions)
McFarlane v. State, 781 P.2d 931 (Wyoming 1989) (discipline on Rule 35(b) and finality considerations)
Mower v. State, 750 P.2d 679 (Wyoming 1988) (standard for appellate review of sentencing decisions)
Fortin v. State, 622 P.2d 418 (Wyoming 1981) (sentencing discretion framework)
Nixon v. State, 51 P.3d 851 (Wyoming 2002) (finality and re-victimization considerations in sentence reduction)