371 P.3d 136
Wyo.2016Background
- On Dec. 26, 2014 Redding resisted arrest at his home; officers wrestled him inside, then escorted him out where he grabbed a gate and elbowed Officer Ableman.
- Officers issued two misdemeanor citations (breach of peace; interference); Redding pled guilty to both in circuit court and was sentenced.
- Three days later the State charged Redding with felony interference based on the elbow injury to Officer Ableman.
- District court denied Redding’s pretrial motion to dismiss the felony on double jeopardy grounds.
- Redding then entered an unconditional no contest plea to a reduced misdemeanor interference charge in district court and appealed, arguing double jeopardy barred the felony prosecution/second conviction.
- The Wyoming Supreme Court reviewed whether the no-contest plea waived the double jeopardy claim and, on the merits, whether the two interference acts were the same offense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Redding) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Redding’s no-contest plea waived his double jeopardy claim | No — double jeopardy is jurisdictional and may be raised anytime; plea should not bar review here | Yes — unconditional plea waives nonjurisdictional defenses (Broce framework) | Court adopted Broce rule but held claim not waived because record at plea contained everything needed to decide the claim |
| Whether prosecution/conviction for interference twice violated double jeopardy | The misdemeanor plea covered the same conduct (elbowing Ableman); second prosecution/punishment barred | The incidents were separate in time/place (inside struggle vs. later elbow at gate); misdemeanor is lesser-included of felony but acts were distinct | Court held no double jeopardy violation: two separate acts at different times/locations supported separate charges |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Broce, 488 U.S. 563 (Sup. Ct.) (guilty plea forecloses collateral double jeopardy attack unless violation is apparent on face of charging documents/record at time of plea)
- Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21 (Sup. Ct.) (due process prevents greater charges after exercise of certain rights; plea does not waive claim that State lacked power to prosecute)
- Menna v. New York, 423 U.S. 61 (Sup. Ct.) (plea does not waive double jeopardy claim that is facially apparent and which the court could decide on the record)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (Sup. Ct.) (statutory-elements test for determining whether two offenses are the same for double jeopardy)
- Pope v. State, 38 P.3d 1069 (Wyo. 2002) (misdemeanor interference is lesser-included offense of felony interference but separate acts/victims permit separate prosecutions)