Opinion
A22-0594
01-30-2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Ishman Lashaunn Richmond, Appellant.
Washington County District Court File No. 82-CR-19-3237
Considered and decided by Bryan, Presiding Judge; Ross, Judge; and Larkin, Judge.
ORDER OPINION
KEVIN G. ROSS, JUDGE
BASED ON THE FILE, RECORD, AND PROCEEDINGS, AND BECAUSE:
1. Ishman Richmond entered an Alford guilty plea to the charge of receiving stolen property, and he now contests the validity of his plea. We review a plea's validity de novo. State v. Raleigh, 778 N.W.2d 90, 94 (Minn. 2010). A district court may accept a defendant's guilty plea while the defendant maintains his innocence only if certain requirements are met. North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37-38 (1970); accord State v. Goulette, 258 N.W.2d 758, 760 (Minn. 1977) (holding that the Minnesota Constitution also allows Alford pleas).
2. Richmond acknowledged during the plea hearing that, based on the state's evidence, there was a substantial likelihood a jury would find him guilty. Suggesting that Richmond need not provide a factual basis for an Alford plea, the district court accepted the plea without receiving a factual basis, convicted Richmond, and sentenced him.
3. But one of the prerequisites to accepting an Alford plea is determining that a strong factual basis supports the plea. State v. Theis, 742 N.W.2d 643, 649 (Minn. 2007). Richmond contends-and the state correctly concedes-that Richmond's Alford plea was invalid. We hold that the district court erroneously accepted Richmond's Alford plea without first establishing a strong factual basis to support it.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. We reverse Richmond's conviction because his guilty plea was invalid, and we remand for further proceedings.
2. Pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1(c), this order opinion is nonprecedential, except as law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.