Legrand v. Weber
2014 SD 71
| S.D. | 2014Background
- LeGrand appeals a habeas corpus denial following a guilty plea to manslaughter in the first degree.
- He waived affirmative defenses including self-defense in a plea agreement that also limited his sentence to no more than 40 years.
- Judge Foley conducted an extensive plea colloquy and the trial court found the plea voluntary, knowing, and intelligent.
- LeGrand later moved to withdraw the plea (claiming a tenable self-defense defense) and the circuit court denied the motion.
- The habeas court denied relief, and LeGrand sought relief in this Court via amended petitions and an evidentiary hearing.
- The Court affirms, holding the plea voluntary/intelligent, res judicata bars withdrawal issues, and LeGrand received no ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the guilty plea voluntary and intelligent? | LeGrand claims the canvass did not address defenses or burdens. | State contends the extensive colloquy established voluntariness and an adequate factual basis. | Plea found voluntary and intelligent. |
| Did the circuit court abuse its discretion in denying withdrawal of the plea? | LeGrand argues denial was improper due to possible defenses and coerced circumstances. | State argues the motion was a change of mind, not withdrawal-worthy. | Res judicata bars reconsideration of this issue. |
| Was LeGrand denied effective assistance of counsel? | Counsel failed to adequately advise on defenses and burdens or timely pursue withdrawal. | Counsel testified to discussions of defenses; performance fell within wide professional range. | No ineffective assistance of counsel. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. King, 2014 SD 19 (South Dakota (2014)) (factors for voluntariness under totality of circumstances)
- Outka, 2014 S.D. 11, 844 N.W.2d 598 (South Dakota (2014)) (Rule 11 and voluntariness standards for guilty pleas)
- Beckley, 2007 S.D. 122, 742 N.W.2d 841 (South Dakota (2007)) (scope of rights canvass and voluntariness)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (U.S. Supreme Court (1970)) (defendant may plead guilty while denying participation when in his best interest)
- United States ex rel. Crosby v. Brierly, 404 F.2d 790 (3rd Cir. (1968)) (examines totality of circumstances in guilty-plea validity)
- Lodermeier v. State, 273 N.W.2d 163 (South Dakota (1978)) (no duty to advise of every potential defense in Rule 11 context)
- Engelmann, 541 N.W.2d 96 (South Dakota (1995)) (presumption in favor of liberal withdrawal of plea before sentencing)