State v. Stone
305 P.3d 167
Utah Ct. App.2013Background
- Stone was charged with aggravated kidnapping, aggravated robbery, and other offenses; he accepted a plea deal: guilty to aggravated kidnapping and reduced to robbery, with other charges dismissed.
- The district court warned Stone that withdrawing pleas would require a motion before sentencing, and the plea statement said withdrawal requests must be before sentencing.
- Stone did not move to withdraw his pleas and was sentenced to concurrent terms of 15 years to life (kidnapping) and 1 to 15 years (robbery).
- Stone appealed the convictions alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and district court error in accepting the pleas, but the State argued the court lacked jurisdiction to review since no timely withdrawal motion was filed.
- The court rejected Stone’s challenges, held there is a jurisdictional bar under Utah Code § 77‑13‑6 for late withdrawal motions, and dismissed the appeal; the court also held the statute constitutional and that challenges must proceed under the PCRA and Rule 65C if relief is sought.
- Stone may pursue relief only through the PCRA and Rule 65C, not direct appeal from the plea-based judgments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is there appellate jurisdiction to review plea validity without a timely withdrawal motion? | Stone argues the plea may be challenged despite the deadline | State asserts §77‑13‑6 bars review absent timely motion | Lacks jurisdiction to review plea validity on direct appeal |
| Is §77‑13‑6 constitutional as applied to claims of ineffective assistance? | Stone contends the bar unconstitutionally burdens defense rights | State relies on Merrill/Rhinehart upholding constitutionality | Constitutional; bar preserved; ineffective-assistance claims must follow §77‑13‑6 route |
Key Cases Cited
- Grimmett v. State, 152 P.3d 306 (Utah 2007) (jurisdictional effect of §77‑13‑6 and time-bar)
- Rhinehart, 167 P.3d 1046 (Utah 2007) (ineffectiveness does not defeat §77‑13‑6 jurisdictional bar)
- Merrill, 114 P.3d 585 (Utah 2005) ( §77‑13‑6 constitutional; two avenues to challenge plea)
- Ott, 247 P.3d 344 (Utah 2010) (addressed limits on reviewing plea validity under §77‑13‑6)
- State v. Briggs, 2006 UT App 448 (Utah App) (PCRA route for post-conviction relief)