Lashon Marcay Pritchett v. Commonwealth of Virginia
61 Va. App. 777
Va. Ct. App.2013Background
- Pritchett charged with statutory rape, forcible sodomy, and aggravated sexual battery under Virginia Code §§ 18.2-61(A), 18.2-67.1(A), 18.2-67.3; multi-term potential sentence.
- Plea agreement under Rule 3A:8(c)(1)(B): prosecution to recommend eight years active incarceration; court advised it could reject recommendation.
- Plea colloquy confirmed the court’s non-binding nature of the recommendation and that rejection could lead to a longer sentence.
- Court ultimately rejected the eight-year recommendation after consideration.
- Pritchett retained new counsel, moved to withdraw guilty pleas alleging misadvice about the court following the recommendation.
- Trial court denied the motion; sentence imposed totaling 120 years with 95 years suspended; appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying withdrawal of guilty pleas before sentencing | Pritchett relied on attorney advice that court would follow recommendation | Commonwealth submitted legitimate sentencing discretion; misapprehension not enough | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed |
| Whether Rule 3A:8(c)(2) colloquy supports withdrawal of pleas under these facts | Colloquy shows misunderstanding that court would follow recommendation | Colloquy properly informs court's authority and defendant's understanding | Colloquy admissible; record supports decision not to withdraw |
| Role of defense evidence alone in warrants for withdrawal under Parris/Justus/Bottoms | Existence of defense plus misadvice warrants withdrawal | Defense alone insufficient without inadvised entry of plea | Defense must be accompanied by inadvised plea; not sufficient here |
| Impact of potential prejudice to Commonwealth in granting withdrawal | No prejudice shown given plea groundwork | Prejudice considerations support denial | No reversible prejudice shown; affirmed |
| Applicability of precedents to Rule 3A:8(c)(1)(B) post-not-following-recommendation context | Inadvisedness from reliance on attorney advice | Standard remains governed by Parris framework | Rule 3A:8(c)(2) considerations properly applied; no error |
Key Cases Cited
- Parris v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 321, 52 S.E.2d 872 (1949) (Va. 1949) (foundation for withdrawal standards; must show mistake or meritorious defense supported by good faith)
- Justus v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 143, 645 S.E.2d 284 (2007) (Va. 2007) (defense must be substantial; admissible grounds to withdrawplea even if plea inadvisedly entered)
- Bottoms v. Commonwealth, 281 Va. 23, 704 S.E.2d 406 (2011) (Va. 2011) (inadvised plea with substantial defense warrants withdrawal)
- Hubbard v. Commonwealth, 60 Va. App. 200, 725 S.E.2d 163 (2012) (Va. App. 2012) (undue influence/pressure circumstances; admissibility of admissions bearing on plea withdrawal)
- Williams v. Commonwealth, 59 Va. App. 238, 717 S.E.2d 837 (2011) (Va. App. 2011) (contextual standards for pre-sentencing withdrawal motions)