Kirby Bryan Ruano v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 2014 SC 000469

Kirby Bryan Ruano was indicted on murder and robbery charges with capital classification; the Commonwealth delayed filing notice of aggravators for over a year.
Ruano moved to exclude aggravated penalties; before that motion was heard he accepted a plea agreement and the court conducted a plea colloquy and accepted his guilty plea.
Sentencing was postponed while a co-defendant was tried; Ruano moved to withdraw his guilty plea prior to sentencing, alleging the plea was involuntary (pressure, threats to family, less than 24 hours to review plea, and pressure from late death-penalty notice).
The trial court conducted an on-the-record, informal inquiry of Ruano and his counsel about the withdrawal motion without swearing them or holding a formal evidentiary hearing, then summarily denied the motion and sentenced Ruano according to the plea agreement.
On appeal Ruano argued (1) the court erred by denying his RCr 8.10 motion without an evidentiary hearing and (2) his Sixth Amendment right to conflict-free counsel was violated because his trial counsel who negotiated the plea participated in the inquiry and appeared adverse to his withdrawal request.
The Kentucky Supreme Court vacated the conviction and denial order and remanded, holding the trial court’s informal resolution implicated Ruano’s right to conflict-free counsel and required rehearing with new counsel if Ruano renews his motion.

Issue	Ruano's Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court could summarily deny a pre-judgment RCr 8.10 motion without an evidentiary hearing when defendant alleges involuntariness	Plea was involuntary due to threats, inadequate time to review, and pressure from late death-penalty notice; entitled to hearing	Trial court relied on the plea colloquy and record; allegations were conclusory and did not require full hearing	A defendant alleging involuntariness is entitled to a hearing if allegations are colorable; summary denial may be proper for facially insufficient claims, but here the court proceeded informally which raised other issues (vacated on different ground)
Whether Ruano was denied effective/conflict-free counsel at the withdrawal inquiry	Trial counsel who negotiated the plea participated in the inquiry and opposed the withdrawal, creating an actual conflict and undermining assistance of counsel	Counsel’s advice against withdrawal did not necessarily create an actual conflict; counsel arguably acted properly and not responsible for Commonwealth’s actions	Court found the informal on-the-record inquiry where trial counsel effectively testified/argued against Ruano created a conflict risk and violated the right to conflict-free counsel; vacated and remanded for proceedings with new counsel if motion is renewed

Williams v. Commonwealth, 229 S.W.3d 49 (Ky. 2007) (defendant alleging involuntary plea is entitled to a hearing)
Edmonds v. Commonwealth, 189 S.W.3d 558 (Ky. 2006) (trial court must grant withdrawal if plea was involuntary)
Rodriguez v. Commonwealth, 87 S.W.3d 8 (Ky. 2002) (standard for reviewing voluntariness and RCr 8.10 motions)
Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63 (U.S. 1977) (solemn in-court statements carry strong presumption of verity)
Bronk v. Commonwealth, 58 S.W.3d 482 (Ky. 2001) (totality of circumstances governs plea voluntariness)
Commonwealth v. Tigue, 459 S.W.3d 372 (Ky. 2015) (withdrawal proceedings are critical stages; counsel conflicts may warrant presumption of prejudice)
United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1984) (situations warranting presumption of prejudice from counsel failure)
Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. 778 (U.S. 2009) (withdrawal proceedings as critical stages requiring counsel)
Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (U.S. 2000) (conflict-of-interest principles)
Martin v. Commonwealth, 409 S.W.3d 340 (Ky. 2013) (manifest injustice remedy discussion)