Martin v. State, 460 S.W.3d 289

Cody Lee Martin, a high-school teacher, was charged with three counts of first-degree sexual assault for an alleged ongoing sexual relationship with a student beginning when she was 14.
Parties negotiated a plea: Martin entered a nolo contendere (no-contest) plea to one count in exchange for dismissal of two counts and a recommended eight-year sentence; he preserved that he did not admit guilt.
At the plea hearing, defense counsel clarified Martin would not be required to admit guilt or provide a factual basis; the court accepted the nolo contendere plea and sentenced Martin to eight years.
Two days later, new counsel filed a timely Rule 26.1 motion to withdraw the plea, arguing ineffective assistance and involuntariness because defense counsel allegedly told him he would be paroled in two years and failed to advise him about the Reduction of Sexual Victimization Program (RSVP), which required admission of guilt for parole eligibility.
At the withdrawal hearing, Martin testified he accepted the plea to avoid greater exposure at trial, for financial reasons, and to spare his family humiliation; he did not assert he would have insisted on trial had he received different advice.
The circuit court denied the motion as raising only collateral consequences (parole eligibility) and not showing manifest injustice; the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Martin's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether Martin could withdraw his nolo contendere plea under Rule 26.1 based on ineffective assistance and involuntariness arising from counsel's alleged incorrect/parol-related advice	Counsel told Martin he would be paroled in two years and failed to advise about RSVP; parole eligibility (requiring admission) was the basis for his plea, so counsel’s errors rendered plea involuntary and ineffective	Parole consequences are collateral; counsel has no duty to advise about parole eligibility unless affirmative misadvice was the basis of the plea; Martin did not show he would have insisted on trial	Affirmed: denial of withdrawal upheld; Martin failed to show counsel’s errors caused him to plead or that he would have insisted on trial

Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (plea must be voluntary and knowing)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice inquiry for plea-stage ineffective-assistance claims)
United States v. Lambros, 544 F.2d 962 (distinguishing direct vs. collateral consequences)
George v. Black, 732 F.2d 108 (collateral vs. direct consequences analysis)
Haywood v. State, 288 Ark. 266 (no constitutional duty to advise parole eligibility; misadvice not automatically invalidating)
Probst v. State, 335 Ark. 448 (erroneous parole advice may support relief when parole eligibility is basis of plea)
Buchheit v. State, 339 Ark. 481 (positive misadvice affecting plea decision can amount to ineffective assistance)