314 P.3d 759
Wyo.2013Background
- Michael Patterson was convicted (accessory before the fact to second-degree murder) and initially sentenced to 20–22 years (240–264 months), which violated Wyo. Stat. § 7-13-201 because the minimum exceeded 90% of the maximum.
- The State moved to correct the illegal sentence and, without proper notice, a judge increased the sentence to 240–267 months; Patterson appealed his conviction (not the sentence) and conviction was affirmed (Patterson I).
- Patterson later filed motions to reduce/correct his sentence; a district court set aside the increased sentence and reinstated the original 20–22 year sentence; this Court (Patterson II) vacated the reinstated original sentence as illegal and remanded for resentencing, instructing the court to indicate it considered probation per Trumbull.
- On remand, after assignment to a new judge, Patterson raised a speedy-sentencing claim; the court denied relief and imposed a corrected sentence of 240–267 months with credit for time served.
- Patterson appealed, arguing speedy sentencing violation, that the sentence remained illegal, and double jeopardy. The State argued res judicata against some claims. The Supreme Court affirmed the amended judgment and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Patterson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Patterson’s right to a speedy sentencing was violated by delay to resentencing | Delay (~6 years from conviction; nearly 6 years until corrected sentence) is presumptively unreasonable under Yates and requires State justification | Speedy-sentencing rule (one-year presumption) does not apply to resentencing; original sentencing was timely; W.R.Cr.P.35(a) allows correction at any time | One-year Yates presumption does not apply to resentencing; court did not abuse discretion because corrected sentence was imposed without "unnecessary delay" after remand |
| Whether the Amended (240–267 mo.) sentence is illegal | Court previously found a 240–267 mo. sentence illegal; original also illegal; cannot keep retrying—remedy should be vacatur without new sentence (three-strikes theory) | W.R.Cr.P.35(a) permits correction of illegal sentences at any time; an illegal sentence carries no finality; corrected sentence complies with statutory limits | Current sentence is legal: minimum does not exceed 90% of maximum; probation consideration language included; rule allowing correction at any time applies |
| Whether increasing Patterson’s sentence after he began serving it violated double jeopardy | Increasing the sentence after service began subjected him to double jeopardy | Double jeopardy does not bar correction of an illegal sentence; defendant had no justifiable expectation of finality (he filed motions/appeal) | No double jeopardy violation because prior sentences were illegal and Patterson lacked a justifiable expectation of finality; increase was corrective, not successive jeopardy |
| Whether claims are barred by res judicata | (Implicit) Claims could be raised earlier but were not | Res judicata precludes raising issues earlier available | Court exercised discretion not to apply res judicata to the speedy-sentencing claim; also allowed consideration of double jeopardy because a new sentence was at issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Patterson v. State, 179 P.3d 863 (Wyo. 2008) (affirming conviction; earlier appeal in case)
- Patterson v. State, 279 P.3d 535 (Wyo. 2012) (vacating illegal sentence and remanding for resentencing)
- Trumbull v. State, 214 P.3d 978 (Wyo. 2009) (sentencing court must state it considered probation)
- Moronese v. State, 271 P.3d 1011 (Wyo. 2012) (discussing limits on double jeopardy where sentence is illegal)
- Yates v. State, 792 P.2d 187 (Wyo. 1990) (one-year presumption of unreasonable delay for initial sentencing)
- Bozza v. United States, 330 U.S. 160 (U.S. 1947) (corrective resentencing does not constitute double jeopardy)
- Maher v. State, 991 P.2d 1248 (Wyo. 1999) (double jeopardy bars increasing a legal sentence after service begins)