286 P.3d 314
Utah Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Smith pled guilty in 1997 to one count of aggravated robbery in connection with a 1997 home invasion.
- The State dropped additional charges; Defendant promptly sought to withdraw the plea, which was denied, and sentencing proceeded.
- Defendant was sentenced to five years to life in prison; he subsequently appealed and the appeal was resolved in 1999.
- In 2000-2010, Defendant pursued post-plea and resentencing motions, including a Rule 22(e) motion to correct an illegal sentence, which sat dormant for years.
- After a new judge took over, the district court vacated and resentenced, allowing another opportunity for appeal; Defendant moved again to withdraw his guilty plea, which was denied.
- The court held that the motion to withdraw was untimely and that res judicata barred further challenges; it also rejected non-jurisdictional claims about the charging information.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the motion to withdraw guilty plea was timely | Smith argues timely filing under 30 days after plea. | Smith contends resentencing restarted the window. | Untimely; no restart of window. |
| Effect of Rule 22(e) on ability to challenge plea years later | Rule 22(e) may undo sentence but not reopen underlying plea issues. | Rule 22(e) somehow allows new challenges to guilty plea. | Rule 22(e) cannot reopen challenges to the conviction; not a basis to withdraw plea years later. |
| Whether res judicata barred a second motion to withdraw | Second motion should be considered anew under Rule 22(e). | Earlier denial and affirmations preclude a second motion. | Res judicata barred the second motion. |
| Whether defects in information charged affected jurisdiction or could be raised late | Information defects could be raised post-plea. | By pleading knowing and voluntary, non-jurisdictional challenges are waived. | Waived non-jurisdictional challenges; not a basis to withdraw plea. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lovell, 2005 UT 31 (Utah Supreme Court 2005) (standard of review for plea withdrawal questions)
- Grimmett v. State, 2007 UT 11 (Utah Supreme Court 2007) (Rule 22(e) does not reopen underlying guilty pleas; no jurisdiction to reconsider)
- State v. Candedo, 2010 UT 32 (Utah Supreme Court 2010) (Rule 22(e) not veiled route to challenge convictions)
- State v. Wareham, 801 P.2d 918 (Utah 1990) (limits of Rule 22(e) as related to second appeals)
- Buckner v. Kennard, 2004 UT 78 (Utah Supreme Court 2004) (res judicata protections after adjudication)