Johnson v. Anis, 731 S.E.2d 914

In 2006 Anis pled guilty by Alford plea to grand larceny in Henrico County; court imposed five years with four years seven months suspended.
Within 21 days of final sentencing, Anis sought to withdraw the plea and proceed to trial; motion denied and not appealed.
In 2008 Anis filed a habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to base withdrawal grounds on mistake, misunderstanding, fear, and misrepresentation.
Circuit court granted the writ of habeas corpus based on Justus and Parris; the appellate court directed an evidentiary hearing.
At the evidentiary hearing, evidence showed Anis claimed permission from an unknown person to remove air-conditioning units, but the owner and circumstances weakened his account; Anis had two prior larceny convictions.
The court concluded the post-sentencing standard under Code § 19.2-296 required a manifest injustice, and found no such injustice; thus the writ was reversed and dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Post-sentencing withdrawal standard	Anis: Justus pre-sentence standard should apply	Johnson: § 19.2-296 post-sentencing standard governs	Statute governs; Justus not applicable after sentencing
Effectiveness of counsel on withdrawal grounds	Anis claims counsel failed to raise grounds of mistake, misunderstanding, fear, misrepresentation	Johnson: no deficiency shown; grounds lack support	No ineffective-assistance error shown based on record
Whether manifest injustice occurred	Anis alleges evident prejudice from plea and limited time to move	Johnson: record shows no manifest injustice	No manifest injustice; writ properly denied

Justus v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 143 (2007) (distinguishes pre- and post-sentencing withdrawal standards)
Parris v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 321 (1949) (early rule cited on plea withdrawal considerations)
Anderson v. Warden, 222 Va. 511 (1981) (ineffective-assistance framework relied upon at habeas stage)