State v. Williams

276 Neb. 716 (2008) · Supreme Court of Nebraska · October 31, 2008 · No. No. S-07-1239

Summary

The Supreme Court of Nebraska affirmed the denial of Bradley K. Williams' motions to withdraw his guilty plea after he was terminated from a domestic violence intervention program. The court held that the plea agreement was valid, that Williams did not establish a fair and just reason for withdrawal by clear and convincing evidence, and that the 90-day jail sentence for third-degree domestic assault was not excessive.

Court
Supreme Court of Nebraska
Writing for the Court
Wright, J.; Heavican, C.J.; Connolly, J.; Gerrard, J.; Stephan, J.; McCormack, J.; Miller-Lerman, J.
Jurisdiction
Nebraska
Decision date
October 31, 2008
Docket number
No. S-07-1239
Procedural posture
Williams appealed to the district court after the county court accepted his guilty plea, denied his motions to withdraw it, and sentenced him to 90 days' incarceration. The district court affirmed, and the Supreme Court of Nebraska affirmed the district court's judgment.
Standard of review
Acceptance of a guilty plea and denial of a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea are reviewed for abuse of discretion. A sentence within statutory limits is reviewed for abuse of judicial discretion.
Precedential value
Published opinion; precedential
Parties
Bradley K. Williams v. State of Nebraska
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

plea bargainingcriminal proceduresentencingappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in accepting Williams' guilty plea.
  2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Williams' presentence motions to withdraw his guilty plea after he was terminated from the intervention program.
  3. Whether Williams' 90-day sentence was excessive.

Holdings

  1. The trial court properly accepted Williams' guilty plea because it advised him of the required constitutional rights and the alternative consequences under the plea agreement, and the plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, intelligently, and understandingly.
  2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Williams' motions to withdraw his guilty plea because he failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence a fair and just reason for withdrawal.
  3. The 90-day sentence was not excessive and was not an abuse of judicial discretion because it was within the statutory limits for a Class I misdemeanor.

Key quotations

After the entry of a plea of guilty or no contest, but before sentencing, a court, in its discretion, may allow a defendant to withdraw his or her plea for any fair and just reason, provided that the prosecution has not been or would not be substantially prejudiced by its reliance on the plea entered.
The right to withdraw a plea previously entered is not absolute, and, in the absence of an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court, refusal to allow a defendant's withdrawal of a plea will not be disturbed on appeal.

Factual background

Williams was charged with third-degree domestic assault, criminal mischief, and disturbing the peace after an altercation with his intimate partner. He pleaded guilty to third-degree domestic assault under an agreement that required him to participate in a batterers' intervention program; successful completion would permit withdrawal of the plea and dismissal of the charge. After Williams was arrested on new domestic-assault charges, the program terminated him before completion, and the county court denied his motions to withdraw the plea. A jury later acquitted him of the new charges, but the county court sentenced him to 90 days' incarceration in the original case.

Procedural history

Williams pleaded guilty to third-degree domestic assault under a plea agreement requiring participation in a domestic violence intervention program. After he was terminated from the program, the county court denied his motions to withdraw the plea and sentenced him to 90 days in jail. The Douglas County District Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…