Christopher D. Balderson v. The State of Wyoming
309 P.3d 809
Wyo.2013Background
- Christopher D. Balderson was charged with two counts of felony aggravated assault and two counts of misdemeanor battery; he pled not guilty and was later represented by counsel.
- After one day of trial (jury selection, opening statements, some evidence), Balderson and the State agreed to a plea: no contest to one felony aggravated assault and one misdemeanor battery in exchange for concurrent 2–4 year terms and dismissal of other counts.
- At the change-of-plea hearing the court recited constitutional advisements but did not advise Balderson, as required by Wyo. Stat. § 7-11-507, that a conviction might disqualify him from possessing firearms under federal law or affect employment requiring a firearm.
- The parties agreed to a post-sentence investigation report (so the judge did not have full prior-conviction information at plea); the PSI contained ambiguous information about Balderson’s prior convictions.
- Balderson appealed, arguing the court’s failure to give the § 7-11-507 firearms advisement required setting aside his plea; the State argued the advisement was unnecessary because Balderson already was disqualified from firearm possession by prior convictions.
- The Wyoming Supreme Court concluded the statutory advisement is mandatory whenever the charged offense "may result" in federal disqualification and reversed and remanded, allowing Balderson to withdraw or re-enter a plea with proper advisement.
Issues
| Issue | Balderson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred in failing to provide the § 7-11-507 firearms advisement before entering judgment on a no-contest plea | Court must advise as required by § 7-11-507; failure requires setting aside the plea | No advisement required if defendant was already disqualified from firearm possession by prior convictions | Held for Balderson: advisement is mandatory when the charge may result in federal disqualification; plea set aside and remanded for new plea/proceedings |
| Whether W.R.Cr.P. 11/32 or due process errors warrant relief (allocution/probation consideration alleged) | Argued additional Rule 11/32 and allocution errors denied due process | State disputed or did not prevail on those claims | Court found the § 7-11-507 error dispositive and did not decide the other claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Starrett v. State, 286 P.3d 1033 (Wyo. 2012) (interpreting § 7-11-507; failure to give firearms advisement requires setting aside plea)
- Lunden v. State, 297 P.3d 121 (Wyo. 2013) (waiver principles for failure to raise plea-advisement claims on direct appeal)
- Hede v. Gilstrap, 107 P.3d 158 (Wyo. 2005) (courts should not read exceptions into statutes the legislature did not enact)
- Waid v. State ex rel. Dep’t of Transp., 996 P.2d 18 (Wyo. 2000) (principles for interpreting modifying clauses and last-antecedent rule)