997 N.W.2d 609
N.D.2023Background
- In March 2022, Moses Ben Yalartai was charged with three counts of gross sexual imposition and one count of contributing to the delinquency of a minor; attorney Tanya Johnson Martinez was appointed.
- A jury trial began in November 2022; after the jury was impaneled Yalartai rejected Martinez but said he was not qualified to represent himself; the court conducted a White Bird competency inquiry and found him not competent to self-represent, keeping Martinez as counsel.
- During trial, after the victim testified and a recess, Yalartai accepted a verbal plea deal: plead guilty to one count (others dismissed); the court conducted a Rule 11 colloquy and accepted the plea, then ordered a presentence investigation.
- With new counsel, Yalartai moved to withdraw his guilty plea about two months later; the district court applied the Guthmiller nine-factor test and denied the motion, finding the plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by factual basis.
- Yalartai appealed, arguing (1) the court abused its discretion in denying withdrawal and (2) his right to self-representation was violated when the court retained Martinez.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused discretion by denying motion to withdraw guilty plea | State: D contends he failed to show a fair and just reason under Guthmiller; court properly weighed factors and plea was voluntary | Yalartai: plea involuntary (coerced by being forced to proceed with Martinez), asserted innocence, wanted different counsel/evidence; plea not Rule 11 compliant | Affirmed. Court did not abuse discretion; defendant failed to meet burden on Guthmiller factors and plea substantially complied with Rule 11 |
| Whether district court violated defendant’s right to self-representation | State: claim waived by voluntary guilty plea (no conditional plea reserving the claim) | Yalartai: court erred by retaining Martinez after he invoked right to self-represent | Waived. Because Yalartai pled guilty without reserving the right to appeal the self-representation ruling, he cannot challenge that pre-plea constitutional claim |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Guthmiller, 924 N.W.2d 785 (2019 ND) (establishes non-exhaustive nine-factor test for pre-sentencing plea withdrawal)
- State v. Lium, 758 N.W.2d 711 (2008 ND) (after defendant shows fair and just reason, burden shifts to State to show substantial prejudice)
- State v. White Bird, 858 N.W.2d 642 (2015 ND) (procedure for competency inquiry regarding self-representation)
- Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (1973) (guilty plea waives independent claims of pre-plea constitutional violations)
- State v. Burr, 598 N.W.2d 147 (1999 ND) (guilty plea waives nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before plea)
- Davies v. State, 917 N.W.2d 8 (2018 ND) (plea must be knowing and voluntary and court must ensure voluntariness under Rule 11)