Rippey v. State
337 P.3d 1071
Utah Ct. App.2014Background
- In July 2008, a ten-year-old (S.B.) reported repeated sexual abuse by Stephen Rippey; Rippey admitted the conduct to the victim’s mother and to a doctor during a post-arrest psychosexual evaluation.
- State charged Rippey with five first-degree felony counts; Rippey pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual abuse of a child and one count of object rape of a child; three counts were dismissed in exchange for the plea.
- Rippey was sentenced to concurrent terms of 15 years to life and did not move to withdraw his plea before sentencing.
- In February 2010 Rippey filed a pro se PCRA petition asserting 17 grounds for relief, including that his plea was not knowing/voluntary due to diminished mental capacity and that trial counsel was ineffective for various failures.
- The district court dismissed eight claims as frivolous, allowed others to proceed, then granted the State’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the remaining claims: it held direct challenges to the plea were procedurally barred and found ineffective-assistance claims failed because Rippey had not pleaded facts showing a reasonable probability he would have rejected the plea and gone to trial.
- Rippey appealed; the Court of Appeals affirmed, declining to address an unpreserved statutory-interpretation argument and concluding the ineffective-assistance claims did not adequately allege prejudice to the voluntariness of the plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Rippey) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Utah Code §77-13-6(2)(c) permits direct plea challenges in PCRA despite procedural bars | §77-13-6(2)(c) requires direct challenges to pleas not moved before sentencing to be pursued under the PCRA, so procedural bars shouldn’t apply | Procedural bars of the PCRA apply to direct challenges that could have been raised earlier | Not reached on merits — issue unpreserved on appeal (no record showing it was raised below) |
| Whether Rippey’s petition adequately pleaded ineffective assistance of counsel to vitiate voluntariness of plea | Petition alleged counsel failed to investigate witnesses, failed to inform court of mental health issues, and failed to advise about evidence — sufficient to show plea was unknowing/involuntary | Even accepting allegations, Rippey did not plead facts showing a reasonable probability he would have rejected the plea and gone to trial; admissions and plea benefits made plea rational | Affirmed dismissal — petition failed to allege prejudice (no facts showing rejection of plea would have been rational) |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-part ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Brown v. State, 308 P.3d 486 (Utah 2013) (standard of review for statutory interpretation and PCRA orders)
- McNair v. State, 328 P.3d 874 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (PCRA pleading standards and application of Rule 12(b)(6))
- Ramirez-Gil v. State, 327 P.3d 1228 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (prejudice inquiry for ineffective-assistance challenge to guilty plea; need to show rejecting plea would have been rational)
- Walker v. State, 308 P.3d 573 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (application of prejudice requirement to plea-withdrawal claims based on counsel error)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (ineffective-assistance prejudice analysis for plea decisions; evaluate rationality under circumstances)