How to access the above link?
Return to nccourts.org
Return to the Opinions Page
1. Appeal and Error_guilty plea_appellate review
Appellate review of the procedures followed in accepting a guilty plea falls outside
N.C.G.S. § 15A-1444, which specifies the grounds for an appeal of right. A writ of certiorari is
required.
2. Sentencing_variance from plea bargain_right to withdraw agreement
A guilty plea was vacated and remanded where the judge failed to inform a defendant of
her right to withdraw her plea after deciding to impose a sentence other than as indicated in the
plea agreement. Defendant's request came the day after sentencing and involved a fair and just
reason (the differing sentence). N.C.G.S. § 15A-1024.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Janette Soles Nelson, for the State.
Eric A. Bach, for defendant-appellant.
Hudson, Judge.
On 4 April 2005, the State indicted defendant for felony
possession of cocaine. On 4 May 2005, defendant pled guilty to
possession of drug paraphernalia. The plea agreement stated that
she would receive a suspended sentence and pay a fine and costs.
The agreement did not include surrender of defendant's nursing
license. The court sentenced defendant to a forty-five days,
suspended for thirty-six months, and ordered defendant to surrender
her nursing license. Defendant moved to withdraw her guilty plea,which motion the court denied. Defendant appeals. As discussed
below, we vacate and remand.
Defendant argues that the court erred in ordering her to
surrender her nursing license when she entered a guilty plea to
possessing drug paraphernalia, when such surrender was not part of
the plea agreement. We agree.
[1] N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1024 (2006) provides:
If at the time of sentencing, the judge for
any reason determines to impose a sentence
other than provided for in a plea arrangement
between the parties, the judge must inform the
defendant of that fact and inform the
defendant that he may withdraw his plea. Upon
withdrawal, the defendant is entitled to a
continuance until the next session of court.
We begin by noting that a challenge to the procedures followed in
accepting a guilty plea does not fall within the scope of N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 15A-1444 (2003), specifying the grounds giving rise to an
appeal as of right. State v. Rhodes, 163 N.C. App. 191, 193, 592
S.E.2d 731, 732 (2004). Defendants seeking appellate review of
this issue must obtain grant of a writ of certiorari. Id.
Defendant here filed a petition with this Court for a writ of
certiorari, and we hereby allow the petition. Thus, we will review
the merits of her contentions.
[2] N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1024 applies when:
the trial judge does not reject a plea
arrangement when it is presented to him but
hears the evidence and at the time for
sentencing determines that a sentence
different from that provided for in the plea
arrangement must be imposed. Under the
express provisions of this statute a defendant
is entitled to withdraw his plea and as amatter of right have his case continued until
the next term.
State v. Williams, 291 N.C. 442, 446-47, 230 S.E.2d 515, 517-18
(1976) (emphasis in original). Where a court fails to inform a
defendant of her right to withdraw a guilty plea pursuant to N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 15A-1024, the sentence must be vacated and the case
remanded for re-sentencing. Rhodes, 163 N.C. App. at 195, 592
S.E.2d at 733. Here, the transcript shows that the court failed to
inform defendant of her right to withdraw her plea after
determining to impose a sentence other than as provided in the plea
arrangement. Because the trial judge failed to follow the
procedure required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1024, we vacate and
remand to the trial court for proceedings consistent with the
statute.
Because we vacate defendant's sentence on this ground, we need
not address defendant's other argument.
The State contends that a request to withdraw a guilty plea
made after sentencing should be granted only to avoid manifest
injustice, citing State v. Handy, 326 N.C. 532, 539, 391 S.E.2d
159, 163 (1990). However, in Handy, our Supreme Court actually
held that, where the delay in moving to withdraw comes within a
day, the motion is prompt and timely and should have been
allowed if [defendant] proffered any fair and just reason for the
motion. Id. at 540, 391 S.E.2d at 163. Here, as in Handy,
defendant moved to withdraw her plea the day after sentencing, and
she should have been allowed since she proffered a fair and justreason, namely that the sentence she received differed from that
specified in her plea agreement.
Vacated and remanded.
Judges HUNTER and CALABRIA concur.
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***