Daniel Woods v. State
2013 MT 212N
Mont.2013Background
- In 2010 Woods pleaded guilty to incest under § 45-5-507, MCA, with a recommended sentence of 40 years, 15 suspended.
- The district court sentenced Woods to restrict parole eligibility for the first 25 years and did not apply the exceptions to mandatory minimums in § 46-18-222, MCA.
- Woods appealed the sentence and this Court affirmed in State v. Woods, 2012 MT 11N, 364 Mont. 549.
- Woods later moved to withdraw his guilty plea, which the district court denied; he did not appeal that denial.
- In August 2012 Woods filed a petition for postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel during plea and sentencing.
- The district court dismissed Woods’s petition as barred by § 46-21-105(2), MCA, and because claims were or could have been raised on direct appeal; it also found conclusory allegations insufficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance at plea/sentencing | Woods contends counsel failed to present character witnesses, advise on parole restrictions, and challenge presentence details. | State contends claims are barred or insufficiently supported and could have been raised on direct appeal. | No reversible error; claims failed. |
| Parole eligibility as mandatory restriction | Woods argues he was misadvised about parole and should have parity with parole after one-quarter sentence. | District court properly informed Woods that parole eligibility could be restricted; issues addressed on appeal. | Affirmed restriction adherence; no error shown. |
| Bar to postconviction relief under § 46-21-105(2), MCA | Woods asserts he was denied meaningful postconviction relief. | Claims barred because they were or could have been raised on direct appeal. | Bar sustained; relief denied. |
| Sufficiency of supporting evidence in petition | Allegations are factual and non-conclusory, showing ineffective assistance. | Conclusive statements insufficient to support petition. | Petition rejected on evidentiary standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Woods, 2012 MT 11N (Mont. 2012) (affirmed direct appeal ruling on sentence)
- Kelly v. State, 300 P.3d 120 (Mont. 2013) (petitions for postconviction relief require substantial support)
- Whitlow v. State, 183 P.3d 861 (Mont. 2008) (precludes relief where not sufficiently supported)
- Baca v. State, 197 P.3d 948 (Mont. 2008) (requires strong showing for ineffective assistance)