Summary
This Rhode Island Supreme Court opinion reviews a trial court's denial of a defendant's motion to reduce his seventy-year criminal sentence under Rule 35. The defendant argued that the sentencing justice improperly relied on a disputed statement regarding his intent to engage in a shootout with police and failed to adequately consider mitigating factors. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that the sentence was well within the trial justice's discretion, justified by the defendant's violent criminal history and unprovoked attack on a responding officer, and noting that the absence of a transcript precluded meaningful review of the alleged due process violation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a guilty‑plea waiver of the right to file a Rule 35 motion bars the motion to reduce the sentence
- Whether the sentencing justice’s consideration of an alleged statement about a shootout with police violated the defendant’s due‑process rights
- Whether the sentencing justice abused discretion in imposing the sentence
Holdings
- The waiver contained in the plea agreement does not, by itself, preclude the trial justice from considering a Rule 35 motion, but the court may rely on it in denying the motion.
- The consideration of the alleged statement did not violate due process because the statement was not essential to the sentencing decision and the sentencing justice exercised proper discretion.
- The sentencing justice’s sentence was within discretion and therefore affirmed.
Key quotations
“A motion to reduce a sentence under Rule 35 ‘is essentially a plea for leniency.’” (at 1)
“Our review of a trial justice’s ruling on a Rule 35 motion is extremely limited.” (at 2)
Factual background
In August 2021 Roman, intoxicated, fired an AR‑15 at police responding to a 911 call after a violent encounter with his girlfriend. He was later arrested, pleaded guilty to eight charges, and was sentenced to seventy years with thirty years to serve, ten of which are non‑parolable.
Procedural history
The Superior Court sentenced Roman to seventy years, denied his Rule 35 motion, and Roman appealed. The Supreme Court reviewed the denial.
Remand instructions
The papers may be returned to the Superior Court.