792 N.W.2d 174
S.D.2010Background
- Shumaker was arrested for Driving Under the Influence on June 18, 2009 and charged with DUI and a Part 2 Information for Fourth Offense DUI under SDCL 32-23-4.6 (Class 5 felony, up to five years).
- The State negotiated a plea agreement capping penitentiary time at three years, with anticipated suspended penitentiary time; record shows no indication of additional suspended time beyond three years.
- On January 6, 2010, a plea hearing occurred; the court advised the rights and accepted a guilty plea to SDCL 32-23-1(1) and admission of Fourth Offense DUI.
- The plea colloquy stated the cap was “no more than three years” in penitentiary and that there would be suspended penitentiary time.
- At a February 23, 2010 sentencing, the court imposed five years in penitentiary with two years suspended, seemingly exceeding the three-year cap.
- Shumaker appeals arguing the court accepted a binding plea agreement but sentenced him beyond its terms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the court comply with the binding plea agreement capping punishment at three years? | Shumaker contends the court was bound to the three-year cap and could not sentence beyond it. | Shumaker argues the court accepted the binding terms and should sentence within three years. | No; the sentence violated the binding cap and the case is remanded for resentencing within the three-year limit. |
| Whether the court properly informed and bound Shumaker under SDCL 23A-7-11 regarding acceptance or rejection of the plea? | State/Shumaker asserts proper advisements indicated acceptance; no explicit rejection. | Shumaker contends the court’s statements implied rejection or ambiguity that could affect binding nature. | The court did not expressly reject the plea nor provide requisite advisements; error in sentencing within the binding agreement. Remand. |
| Does the sentencing within five years with two suspended violate the Reaves framework for time served plus suspended time under a cap? | State argues the sentence could be within the cap when considering suspended time. | Shumaker asserts the total lock-up time exceeds the cap. | The combined lock-up and suspended time exceeded the three-year cap; improper under Reaves. Remand. |
| Should the case be remanded for resentencing within the plea cap? | N/A (court's decision). | N/A (court's decision). | Yes; remanded for resentencing within the plea agreement bounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Reaves, 2008 S.D. 105 (S.D. 2008) (binding plea agreements must be honored; sentence includes suspended time as part of the cap)
- State v. Lohnes, 344 N.W.2d 686 (S.D. 1984) (court bound by plea agreement terms and implications for sentencing under cap)
- State v. Rich, 305 N.W.2d 390 (S.D. 1981) (SDCL 23A-7-8(2) non-binding plea (recommendation) distinctions, court not bound by recommendations)
- State v. Lee, 560 N.W.2d 552 (S.D. 1997) (non-acceptance of recommendation not rejection of plea bargain; implications for withdrawal rights)