State ex rel. Curry v. Guillory

Nov 18, 1983
82-KH-2514
Reporters:
Before:
Per Curiam (per curiam)

PER CURIAM.

Granted. The record supports relator‘s claim that he entered his plea of guilty to felony theft, La.R.S. 14:67, with a reasonable but mistaken impression of his total sentencing liability. Cf., State ex rel. La-Fleur ‍​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‍v. Donnelly, 416 So.2d 82 (La.1982). The transcript of the Boykin colloquy on May 28, 1981, shows clearly that relator‘s attorney recommended he plea under the misapprehension that the promised two-year sentence would mark the final release date of relator from the Department of Corrections, despite ‍​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‍the fact that the plea would also automatically revoke relator‘s parole on a previous conviction. R.S. 15:574.10. That misunderstanding was never expressly corrected by the trial court or the state at the plea hearing. However, while relator‘s parole term was due to expire at ‍​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‍the end of the next two years, he owed a balance of nearly 8 years on his original sentence at the time of his release on parole, and would have to serve it upon revocation. R.S. 15:574.9(E).

Accordingly, this case is remanded to the district ‍​​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‍court for purposes of giving the relator the opportunity, at his option, to withdraw his guilty plea entered on May 28, 1981.