Todd v. State
2016 UT App 232
| Utah Ct. App. | 2016Background
- In 1999 Shayne E. Todd shot and killed his estranged wife; he was convicted of first-degree murder and, after pleading guilty, possession of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person.
- Todd pursued direct appeal and multiple post-conviction and sentence-correction efforts; prior appeals and post-conviction petitions were previously denied and affirmed on appeal.
- On July 19, 2016 the district court dismissed Todd’s second petition for post-conviction relief as frivolous or previously adjudicated under Utah R. Civ. P. 65C(h)(1).
- Todd did not timely appeal the July 19 order; instead, on August 9, 2016 he filed seven submissions (motions to reconsider, to withdraw plea, to amend, supplemental materials, and memoranda).
- The district court denied those August 9 submissions in an August 24, 2016 order, finding no newly discovered evidence and that the filings reargued precluded or previously decided claims.
- Todd appealed the August 24 order; this court limited review to whether the district court erred in denying the seven August 9 submissions and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Todd) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the August 9 submissions entitled Todd to relief or tolled appeal time | Submissions raised newly discovered evidence and new claims; sought reconsideration and leave to amend | Submissions reargued precluded claims, did not show new evidence, and did not extend appeal time | Denied — submissions did not demonstrate new evidence; claims precluded; district court did not err |
| Whether the court had jurisdiction to consider an untimely motion to withdraw the 1999 guilty plea | Motion to withdraw plea filed Aug 9 sought to vacate plea | State: motion untimely and district court lacked jurisdiction; relief must be sought under rule 4(f) | Denied — motion untimely, district court lacked jurisdiction |
| Whether claims attacking Board of Pardons’ sentence calculation may be added in PCRA petition | Todd argued Board miscalculated consecutive sentences and sought to add claim | State: claims against Board are not proper in a PCRA petition and must be pursued by extraordinary relief under rule 65B | Denied — procedural route improper; such claims must be pursued under rule 65B |
| Whether previously raised prosecutorial-misconduct and accidental-shooting defenses are cognizable now | Todd reasserted accidental-shooting defense and prosecutorial-misconduct claims | State: these claims were raised or could have been raised on direct appeal and are precluded by PCRA preclusion provisions | Denied — precluded as previously adjudicated or could-have-been-raised claims |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Todd, 173 P.3d 170 (Utah Ct. App. 2007) (affirming murder conviction)
- Todd v. State, 262 P.3d 1222 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (affirming dismissal of first post-conviction petition)
- State v. Todd, 312 P.3d 936 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (affirming denial of motion to correct illegal sentence)
- Gillett v. Price, 135 P.3d 861 (Utah 2006) (postjudgment motions titled "reconsideration" do not toll appeal periods)