Rohn v. People, 2012 WL 5901924

Rohn charged in 2003 with possession with intent to distribute after concealing marijuana in checked luggage; later pled guilty to the lesser offense of simple possession under 19 V.I.C. § 607(a) and faced probation in lieu of conviction under § 607(b)(1).
The Superior Court warned that pleading guilty would trigger a two-year suspension of driving privileges under 20 V.I.C. § 378(a).
Both Rohn and the People objected that § 378(a) does not apply to those who receive § 607(b)(1) probation; the court tentatively accepted the plea to preserve this issue for briefing.
April 20, 2011 Opinion held § 378(a) applies to all who plead guilty, even if no conviction results due to § 607(b)(1) probation.
September 21, 2011 sentencing imposed probation (six months) but kept the two-year license suspension in abeyance; December 6, 2011 Judgment and Sentence memorialized that suspension; Rohn appealed.
April 18, 2012, probation discharged and charges dismissed; court reversed the April 20, 2011 Opinion and the portion of the December 6, 2011 Judgment and Sentence suspending license.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 378(a) applies to probation without conviction under § 607(b)(1).	Rohn contends § 378(a) should apply only upon conviction, not probation.	People argued § 378(a) applies to pleas of guilty regardless of eventual conviction.	§ 378(a) does not apply to § 607(b)(1) probation cases; no license suspension.
Whether the December 6, 2011 Judgment and Sentence qualifies as a “judgment” for § 378(c) purposes.	Judgment should be interpreted consistent with Rule 134(b) and prior statutes.	Superior Court treated the order as a judgment triggering § 378.	The December 6, 2011 Order was not a proper “judgment”; § 378 does not apply.
Do the plain meaning and legislative intent favor applying § 607(b)(1) over § 378?	Statutes should be read to give effect to probation without conviction.	Legislature intended license revocation for drug offenses broadly.	Plain text and more specific § 607(b)(1) control; § 378 does not override.

Potter v. People, 56 V.I. 779 (V.I. 2012) (final judgments; jurisdiction under § 32(a))
Browne v. People, 56 V.I. 207 (V.I. 2012) (final judgments; jurisdiction under § 32(a))
Melendez v. People, 56 V.I. 244 (V.I. 2012) (final judgments; jurisdiction under § 32(a))
Defoe v. Phillip, 56 V.I. 109 (V.I. 2012) (statutory interpretation; peculiar meaning of legal terms)
Public Servs. Com’n v. V.I. WAPA, 49 V.I. 478 (V.I. 2008) (when two statutes cover same situation, more specific prevails)
Gilbert v. People, 52 V.I. 350 (V.I. 2009) (statutory interpretation; proper application of text)