State v. Fucci, 117 A.3d 419

In 2011 Fucci allegedly sought to hire someone to kill a plaintiff (B.W.) in a pending Vermont civil suit; the hiree was a confidential informant.
Original charges included attempted first-degree murder and inciting to felony; the information was amended and Fucci ultimately pled guilty to obstruction of justice (13 V.S.A. § 3015) and two counts of inciting to felony.
At arraignment on March 15, 2013 Fucci pled guilty to the obstruction count and received a 10–15 year sentence; he did not object at the plea colloquy but appealed after conviction.
On appeal Fucci challenged his obstruction plea as invalid, arguing (1) absence of jurisdiction because the plea record did not specify the crime’s location, (2) lack of factual basis for the required overt act, and (3) absence of admitted mens rea (the word “corruptly”).
The prosecutor recited facts the defendant agreed to: he believed he had reached an agreement with another person to have the civil plaintiff killed and "sought to knowingly, wrongfully, and unlawfully obstruct the due administration of justice."

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction based on location	State: jurisdiction exists; location need not be an element at plea	Fucci: plea record lacks admission location, so court lacked jurisdiction	Court: geographic location is not an element of §3015; Rule 11(f) need not recite location; no jurisdictional defect
Factual basis for overt act (endeavor)	State: prosecutor’s recital and defendant’s agreement supplied factual basis	Fucci: recital only shows belief (state of mind), not an overt act endeavoring to obstruct	Court: context shows "believed he had reached an agreement" implies an endeavor; recital satisfied Rule 11(f)
Mens rea ("corruptly endeavor") requirement	State: defendant’s admission that he "sought to knowingly, wrongfully, and unlawfully obstruct" plus admitted conduct suffice	Fucci: plea contained no explicit admission of corrupt/evil intent, so plea involuntary	Court: intent may be inferred from acts; seeking to have an opposing party killed evidences willful, corrupt intent; plea voluntary and sufficient
Standard of review for unobjected plea challenges	State: plain-error review applies to unpreserved plea colloquy errors	Fucci: seeks reversal despite lack of contemporaneous objection	Court: applied plain-error review for plea colloquy issues; de novo for jurisdictional questions

State v. Wiley, 181 Vt. 300 (Vt. 2007) (discusses "endeavor" element of Vermont obstruction statute and reliance on federal law)
United States v. Aguilar, 515 U.S. 593 (U.S. 1995) (federal obstruction standard: knowledge that actions likely affect proceeding and natural and probable effect of interference)
Pettibone v. United States, 148 U.S. 197 (U.S. 1893) (omnibus obstruction provision requires knowledge of administration of justice and specific intent to interfere)
State v. Stocks, 94 A.3d 1143 (Vt. 2014) (Rule 11(f) requires defendant admit facts as they relate to legal elements; prosecutor recitation plus defendant confirmation can suffice)
State v. Yates, 726 A.2d 483 (Vt. 1999) (explains Rule 11(f) factual-basis requirement)
State v. Marku, 176 Vt. 607 (Vt. 2004) (plain-error standard for unpreserved plea-colloquy errors)
State v. Cram, 184 Vt. 531 (Vt. 2008) (a defendant’s intent can be inferred from the nature of his acts; applies to guilty pleas)