Opinion
Court of Appeals No. A-12054 No. 6450
04-05-2017
DWAYNE A. KEELING, Appellant, v. STATE OF ALASKA, Appellee.
Appearances: Amanda Harber, Assistant Public Defender, and Quinlan Steiner, Public Defender, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Richard R. Moses, Assistant District Attorney, Kodiak, and Craig W. Richards, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.
NOTICE Memorandum decisions of this Court do not create legal precedent. See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d) and Paragraph 7 of the Guidelines for Publication of Court of Appeals Decisions (Court of Appeals Order No. 3). Accordingly, this memorandum decision may not be cited as binding authority for any proposition of law. Trial Court No. 3KO-13-472 CR MEMORANDUM OPINION on Rehearing Appeal from the Superior Court, Third Judicial District, Kodiak, Steve Cole, Judge. Appearances: Amanda Harber, Assistant Public Defender, and Quinlan Steiner, Public Defender, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Richard R. Moses, Assistant District Attorney, Kodiak, and Craig W. Richards, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee. Before: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, Allard, Judge, and Suddock, Superior Court Judge. Judge MANNHEIMER.
Sitting by assignment made pursuant to Article IV, Section 16 of the Alaska Constitution and Administrative Rule 24(d).
Pursuant to a plea bargain, Dwayne A. Keeling pleaded guilty to felony driving under the influence, and he also admitted that he had violated his probation from a prior conviction for felony DUI in 2009. The plea bargain called for Keeling to receive a sentence of 4 years' imprisonment with 2 years suspended in the new felony DUI case, and for Keeling to receive 5 months of his previously suspended jail time in the 2009 case. The parties further agreed that Keeling's probation from the 2009 case would be terminated.
The plea agreement left two components of Keeling's sentence to be resolved by the sentencing judge: the conditions of Keeling's probation for the new DUI conviction, and the length of that probation.
The superior court imposed a probationary term of 5 years. Keeling now challenges this probationary term, claiming it is excessive. Keeling contends that the superior court should have imposed a significantly shorter period of probation.
The record reveals that, in addition to Keeling's two convictions for felony DUI in Alaska, he also has convictions for driving under the influence in the states of Washington and Oregon. Keeling had previously received warnings, and had had his probation revoked, for failing to report to alcohol treatment and for failing to abide by treatment recommendations. While on probation, despite being ordered not to consume alcoholic beverages, Keeling was repeatedly found to have been drinking, as confirmed by urine and breath tests.
Given this record, the sentencing judge could reasonably conclude that Keeling's rehabilitation was problematic, and that Keeling should be supervised for a long period of time. We conclude that the sentencing judge was not clearly mistaken when he placed Keeling on probation for 5 years.
Accordingly, the sentencing decision of the superior court is AFFIRMED.