McDowell v. State

2018 MT 287, 430 P.3d 528 · Supreme Court of Montana · November 27, 2018

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Shawn Earl McDowell's petition for post-conviction relief. The court held that comments by the trial judge encouraging acceptance of a plea agreement did not have a coercive effect and that McDowell failed to establish prejudice from counsel's failure to object to those comments. The opinion is a noncitable memorandum opinion.

Court
Supreme Court of Montana
Writing for the Court
Justice James Jeremiah Shea; James Jeremiah Shea; Laurie McKinnon; Beth Baker; Ingrid Gustafson; Jim Rice
Jurisdiction
Montana
Decision date
November 27, 2018
Procedural posture
Appeal from the denial of a petition for postconviction relief alleging that the trial judge improperly participated in plea negotiations and that appointed counsel was ineffective for failing to object.
Standard of review
The court reviews denial of a postconviction-relief petition for clear error as to factual findings and correctness as to conclusions of law. Ineffective-assistance claims, as mixed questions of law and fact, are reviewed de novo.
Precedential value
Nonprecedential; memorandum opinion expressly designated noncitable under Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating Rules.
Parties
Shawn Earl McDowell v. State
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

post-conviction reliefineffective assistanceplea bargainingright to counselcriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawpostconviction reliefcriminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial judge's participation in plea discussions was improper or coercive under the circumstances.
  2. Whether defense counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to the judge's comments or advise McDowell to disregard them.
  3. Whether the district court properly denied postconviction relief.

Holdings

  1. Judicial participation in plea negotiations is not categorically prohibited in Montana; whether it is improper or coercive depends on the individual case record. On this record, the judge's comments did not coerce McDowell into entering his plea.
  2. McDowell failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel because he did not prove actual prejudice: there was no reasonable probability that, absent counsel's alleged errors, he would have rejected the plea and proceeded to trial.

Key quotations

Judicial participation may be improper or coercive when a judge takes an active role in the discussion and outlines the terms of the plea agreement, or when a judge makes threats or promises that induce a defendant to accept a plea agreement he would not otherwise have taken. (¶ 14)
Because Judge McCarter's comments lacked coercive effect, McDowell has failed to demonstrate actual prejudice under the second prong of Strickland. (¶ 17)

Factual background

Judge Dorothy McCarter advised McDowell during a January 30, 2009 status hearing that the State's plea offer was a good or great deal and that rejecting it would be unwise. McDowell later pleaded nolo contendere to assault with a weapon and felony burglary and received concurrent prison sentences. In postconviction proceedings, McDowell claimed that the judge's comments coerced his plea and that appointed counsel was ineffective for failing to object or advise him to disregard the comments.

Procedural history

McDowell pleaded nolo contendere to assault with a weapon and felony burglary after the State amended the charges pursuant to a plea agreement. His motion to withdraw the plea was denied, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed his convictions in 2011, remanding only for credit for time served. McDowell later filed a postconviction-relief petition challenging judicial participation in the plea negotiations and alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. After an evidentiary hearing, the First Judicial District Court denied relief, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…