State v. Charles Earl Guess

154 Idaho 521 (2013) · Supreme Court of the State of Idaho · April 25, 2013 · No. 39646-2012

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Charles Earl Guess’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea to aggravated assault and dismiss the charge after he completed probation. The court held that Idaho Code section 19-2604(1) did not create an entitlement to relief upon successful completion of probation and that the plea agreement did not promise such relief. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering the victim’s continuing fear when denying the requested relief.

Holdings

  1. A plea agreement cannot guarantee that a defendant will be permitted to withdraw a guilty plea and have the charge dismissed solely upon successful completion of probation because Idaho Code section 19-2604(1) requires additional findings and preserves the district court's discretion.
  2. The written plea agreement did not provide that Guess was entitled to withdraw his plea and obtain dismissal if he completed probation, and the plea colloquy did not amend the agreement or create such a promise.
  3. The district court's denial of Guess's motion did not extend his probation indefinitely; his probation lasted five years and terminated when that period expired.
  4. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Guess's request to withdraw his guilty plea and dismiss the charge, even though he had complied with probation and the court found no further cause to continue probation.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the written plea agreement entitled Guess to withdraw his guilty plea and obtain dismissal of the charge upon successful completion of probation.
  2. Whether the plea colloquy modified the written plea agreement or created a promise that Guess would receive dismissal after completing probation.
  3. Whether denial of the requested relief indefinitely extended probation or violated due process.
  4. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying relief under Idaho Code section 19-2604(1), based in part on the victim's continued fear.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (9)

  • State v. Funk, 123 Idaho 967, 969, 855 P.2d 52, 54 (1993)(followed)
  • State v. Branson, 128 Idaho 790, 793, 919 P.2d 319, 322 (1996)(followed)
  • State v. Gomez, 153 Idaho 253, 281 P.3d 90 (2012)(followed)
  • Rife v. Long, 127 Idaho 841, 848, 908 P.2d 143, 150 (1995)(followed)
  • State v. Hardwick, 150 Idaho 580, 581, 249 P.3d 379, 380 (2011)(followed)
  • Ex parte Grove, 43 Idaho 775, 779, 254 P. 519, 520 (1927)(followed)
  • Athay v. Stacey, 142 Idaho 360, 365, 128 P.3d 897, 902 (2005)(followed)
  • State v. Dieter, 153 Idaho 730, 291 P.3d 413, 417-18 (2012)(followed)
  • Johannsen v. Utterbeck, 146 Idaho 423, 429, 196 P.3d 341, 347 (2008)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…