312 P.3d 76
Wyo.2013Background
- Russell was charged with conspiracy to deliver methamphetamine in Natrona County (Wyoming) and pled nolo contendere pursuant to a plea agreement for an 8–14 year sentence.
- Before sentencing, Russell retained new counsel who moved to withdraw the plea under Rule 32(d) and Frame factors.
- The district court held a hearing, denied withdrawal, and concluded Rule 11 advisements were satisfied and the plea was voluntary.
- The court also found 7 Frame factors weighed against withdrawal and considered § 7-11-507 advisements to be inapplicable.
- Russell appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion by denying withdrawal.
- The Supreme Court reviews a denial of a pre-sentence plea withdrawal motion for abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying the plea withdrawal | Russell; argues fair and just reason shown under Rule 32(d) and Frame. | State; contends Rule 11 compliance forecloses withdrawal and Frame factors weigh against it. | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Frame v. State, 29 P.3d 86 (Wy. 2001) (adopted seven-factor test for plea withdrawal discretion)
- Dobbins v. State, 298 P.3d 807 (Wy. 2012) (Frame factors apply; not limited to Rule 11 alone)
- Schmidt v. State, 668 P.2d 656 (Wy. 1983) (withdrawal requires fair and just reason; Rule 11 not sole focus)