Summary
The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Gerald Lopes’s application for postconviction relief following his nolo contendere pleas to burglary, breaking and entering, and receiving stolen goods. The court rejected claims that the plea was unknowing or involuntary and that trial counsel was ineffective, concluding that the plea colloquy satisfied Rule 11 and that Lopes failed to establish deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland v. Washington.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Lopes's nolo contendere pleas were entered knowingly and voluntarily.
- Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance that caused Lopes to enter the pleas rather than proceed to trial.
- Whether the factual basis for the burglary plea sufficiently established an intent to commit a felony.
- Whether the Superior Court properly denied Lopes's application for postconviction relief.
Holdings
- Lopes failed to prove that his nolo contendere pleas were entered unknowingly or involuntarily.
- Lopes failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel under the Strickland standard.
- The factual basis was sufficient to support the burglary plea because the record supported an inference that Lopes intended to commit a felony larceny, even though the prosecutor did not expressly state that the intended larceny involved property valued over $500.
Key quotations
“First, the applicant must establish that counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient; [t]his requires [a] showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed * * * by the Sixth Amendment.” (at 6)
“Thus, while Lopes “now apparently regrets his decision to plead to the charges[,] * * * we conclude that on the critical day of [November 19, 2008], he did so voluntarily.”” (at 8)
“The [Superior] [C]ourt * * * shall not accept * * * a plea of nolo contendere without first addressing the defendant personally and determining that the plea is made voluntarily with understanding of the nature of the charge and the consequences of the plea.” (at 9)
Factual background
Lopes was charged with burglary, breaking and entering, and multiple counts of receiving stolen goods. After the Superior Court denied his motions to suppress evidence, Lopes withdrew his not-guilty plea and entered nolo contendere pleas pursuant to an agreement that included withdrawal of the state's habitual-offender notice. During a detailed plea colloquy, Lopes acknowledged understanding the charges, waived trial-related rights, admitted the factual basis, and stated that he was satisfied with counsel. He later sought postconviction relief, claiming that his plea was involuntary and that trial counsel was ineffective, but the Superior Court found his testimony not credible and counsel's testimony credible.
Procedural history
Lopes pleaded nolo contendere to burglary, breaking and entering, and receiving stolen goods and received concurrent sentences, including a thirty-year sentence on the burglary charge with twenty years to serve. He later filed an application for postconviction relief alleging constitutional violations, ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and other grounds. After an evidentiary hearing, the Superior Court denied relief in a written decision dated April 26, 2011; judgment entered May 13, 2011. The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed and remanded the record to the Superior Court.
Remand instructions
The record was remanded to the Superior Court following affirmance of the judgment.