State v. Ballard

890 A.2d 1238 (R.I. 2005) · Supreme Court of Rhode Island · December 22, 2005 · No. No. 2003-140-C.A.

Summary

The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Michael A. Ballard’s motion to reduce his criminal sentence under Superior Court Rule 35. The court held that the motion was time-barred because it was filed more than 120 days after the Supreme Court’s mandate, and declined to excuse the untimeliness based on Ballard’s pro se status.

Court
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Jurisdiction
Rhode Island
Decision date
December 22, 2005
Docket number
No. 2003-140-C.A.
Procedural posture
Defendant appealed from a Superior Court magistrate's denial of his Rule 35 motion to reduce sentence as untimely and not properly before the court.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court considered the legal timeliness and applicability of Rule 35 and summarily decided the appeal after a show-cause order.
Precedential value
Published Rhode Island Supreme Court per curiam order; precedential value not otherwise limited in the opinion.
Parties
Michael A. Ballard v. State
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

sentencingcriminal procedureappellate procedurepost-conviction reliefsentence modification

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal proceduresentencingappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Ballard's later Rule 35 motion could be treated as a timely motion for reconsideration of his prior Rule 35 motion.
  2. Whether the 120-day filing period in Rhode Island Superior Court Rule of Criminal Procedure 35 barred Ballard's later sentence-reduction motion.
  3. Whether Ballard's pro se status excused the untimely filing.

Holdings

  1. Any Rule 35 motion to reduce a sentence must be filed within 120 days after receipt by the court of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island's mandate issued upon affirmance of the judgment or dismissal of the appeal. Ballard's motion, filed more than three years after the prior Supreme Court decision, was time-barred.
  2. Ballard's pro se status did not make his untimely Rule 35 motion timely or otherwise excuse compliance with the rule's filing deadline.

Key quotations

Regardless of whether defendant's motion is characterized as one for reconsideration of his previous motion to reduce sentence or as a second motion to reduce sentence, any Rule 35 motion must be made within 120 days of the "mandate of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island." (1239)

Factual background

Ballard's original sentence consisted of two consecutive life sentences plus an additional sixty-five years. Following timely sentence-reduction proceedings, the sentence was reduced to two life sentences and an additional sixty-five years, all concurrent. On November 6, 2000, more than three years after the Supreme Court issued its decision on the prior Rule 35 appeal, Ballard filed a further pro se motion to reduce his sentence.

Procedural history

Ballard was convicted in the Superior Court of conspiracy to kidnap with intent to extort, kidnapping and related firearm and assault offenses. After an initial timely Rule 35 motion, the Superior Court reduced his sentence, and the Supreme Court further reduced it in State v. Ballard, 699 A.2d 14 (R.I. 1997). More than three years after the Supreme Court's decision, Ballard filed another pro se Rule 35 motion, which the magistrate denied as procedurally improper. The Supreme Court affirmed and remanded the record to the Superior Court.

Remand instructions

The record shall be remanded to the Superior Court.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…