112 So. 3d 353
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- Pete was charged with two counts of forcible rape and one count of second degree kidnapping; he pled not guilty and later pled guilty under Crosby while preserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to quash.
- The trial court sentenced Pete to twenty years on each count, with consecutive terms; later, a multiple bill charged him as a second offender based on a prior rape conviction.
- Pete pled guilty to the multiple bill in 2011; the court vacated the original sentences and resentenced him under La. R.S. 15:529.1 to twenty years on all three counts concurrent, with time served credits.
- At an out-of-time appeal, the court reviewed the record and found a patent error: the State charged him as a multiple offender for one forcible rape conviction, but the court enhanced sentences on other counts.
- The court vacated the enhanced sentences for the second forcible rape and the kidnapping counts and remanded for resentencing; convictions on two forcible rape counts and one kidnapping count were affirmed.
- Pete filed pro se assignments; the court treated some as non-jurisdictional defects and declined to entertain them, noting Crosby precluded review of certain issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the multiple-offender enhancement proper? | Pete | Pete | Enhancements vacated for counts 2 and kidnapping; remanded for resentencing |
| Did the trial court err in applying the multiple-offender statute to all counts when only one count had a prior conviction? | State | Pete | Vacate enhanced sentences; remand for resentencing on remaining counts |
| Are the pro se assignments reviewable given the Crosby plea? | Pete | Pete | Non-jurisdictional defects not entertained; Crosby plea limits review |
| Was there any patent error in sentencing that requires remand? | State | Pete | Yes; vacate certain enhancements and remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure for independent review of non-meritorious appeals)
- State v. Benjamin, 573 So.2d 528 (La.App. 4 Cir.1990) (independent review of record when counsel raises no nonfrivolous issue)
- State v. Sellers, 902 So.2d 418 (La.App. 4 Cir.2005) (non-jurisdictional defects not entertained after Crosby plea)
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972) (speedy-trial right framework and its application)
- State v. Moore, 420 So.2d 1099 (La.1982) (review of non-jurisdictional defects and post-conviction avenues)
- State v. Jyles, 704 So.2d 241 (La.1987) (procedural requirements for Anders-type review)