State v. McDonald
211 N.J. 4
| N.J. | 2012Background
- Defendant Barrington McDonald appealed the trial court’s denial of his motion to vacate a guilty plea to three offenses arising from an automobile accident while intoxicated.
- The indictment charged second-degree assault by automobile in a school zone under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(c)(3)(a) and related motor-vehicle offenses.
- McDonald pled guilty to the three offenses pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement that recommended a single three-year sentence for all three offenses.
- The plea colloquy included a finding that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to a jury trial.
- Before sentencing, McDonald moved to withdraw the plea, asserting the plea was not entered knowingly or with a proper factual basis, including challenge to whether the accident occurred within 1,000 feet of school property.
- The trial court denied the motion and imposed concurrent and consecutive penalties for the three offenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McDonald shows a colorable claim of innocence under Slater. | Slater factors weigh against withdrawal; record shows the accident occurred within 1,000 feet of school property used for school purposes. | There is a colorable innocence claim because the accident location relative to the school property is disputed and may not meet the statutory definition. | No colorable innocence; Slater factors favor denying withdrawal. |
| Whether N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(c)(3)(a) applies to the entire property surrounding the school and at all times, including church-owned lands, thus making the offense within a 1,000-foot radius. | The statute applies to any school property used for school purposes, including parochial school surroundings, and 1,000 feet begins at the property boundary, not the building; applies 24/7. | Parochial church property should be scrutinized to determine whether it is all within the school property boundary and whether the 1,000-foot zone starts at the parking lot; nighttime applicability is disputed. | The school property includes the church-owned school complex; the 1,000-foot boundary begins at the outer boundary of the school property and the statute applies at all times. |
| Whether the plea had a valid factual basis for recklessness and for driving with a suspended license. | There was a sufficient factual basis for recklessness given intoxication and speeding; the license-suspension issue had a factual basis. | Record shows potential lack of definitive factual basis for the school-zone element and for the suspended-license plea; the plea should be vacated for inadequate basis. | Factual bases supported the plea; the plea was valid on recklessness and suspended-license grounds; the case on remand concerns only the suspended-license aspect. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Slater, 198 N.J. 145 (N.J. 2009) (four-factor test for withdraw of guilty pleas; pre-sentence/post-sentence standards; interests of justice)
- State v. Munroe, 210 N.J. 429 (N.J. 2012) (colorable innocence and liberal plea-withdrawal standards; jury needed on key issues)
- State v. Ivory, 124 N.J. 582 (N.J. 1991) (construction of school property for CDS penalties; broad interpretation of property surrounding schools)
- State v. Shelley, 205 N.J. 320 (N.J. 2011) ( CDS school-zone interpretation extending to parochial/private schools; no public/private distinction for ‘school property’)