Commonwealth v. Reed
374 S.W.3d 298
Ky.2012Background
- Reed pled guilty to multiple felonies under a Commonwealth plea agreement that recommended a total five-year sentence and a $1,000 felony fine, with defense objecting to the fine.
- The circuit court found Reed indigent and allowed public defender representation; Reed was sentenced to five years and fined $1,000 on December 16, 2009.
- At sentencing, the defense objected to the fine citing Simpson and KRS 534.030, and the court did not enforce the objection beyond noting it.
- The Court of Appeals vacated the $1,000 felony fine as improper but left the five-year sentence intact.
- The Commonwealth conceded the fine was improper and that the imposition of the fine was not part of the plea agreement, but rather within the court’s discretion.
- The Supreme Court held that the fine could be reversed without invalidating the plea agreement because the fine was outside the scope of the agreement and the parties bargained over its imposition, not its existence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the illegal fine may be reversed while keeping the plea intact | Reed | Commonwealth | Fine reversed; plea remains valid |
| Whether the remedy requires withdrawing the guilty plea or merely excising the fine | Reed | Commonwealth | Remedy is to reverse the fine; plea remains intact |
Key Cases Cited
- Windsor v. Commonwealth, 250 S.W.3d 306 (Ky. 2008) (sentencing issues may be raised on appeal despite guilty plea)
- Grigsby v. Commonwealth, 302 S.W.3d 52 (Ky. 2010) (sentencing discretion and statutory compliance reviewed)
- McClanahan v. Commonwealth, 308 S.W.3d 694 (Ky. 2010) (plea agreements interpreted as contracts; illegal sentences remedy varies by scope)
- Covington v. Commonwealth, 295 S.W.3d 814 (Ky. 2009) (plea agreement interpretation under contract principles)
- O'Neil v. Commonwealth, 114 S.W.3d 860 (Ky. App. 2003) (contractual interpretation of plea agreements)
- Simpson v. Commonwealth, 889 S.W.2d 781 (Ky. 1994) (relevance of indigent status to fines)
- Elmore v. Commonwealth, 236 S.W.3d 623 (Ky. App. 2007) (benefit to bargain in plea agreements)
- Hensley v. Commonwealth, 217 S.W.3d 885 (Ky. App. 2007) (plea agreements and sentencing considerations)
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969) (requirement of Boykin colloquy in guilty pleas)