Matthews v. State

8 Citing cases

  1. Garza v. State

    2020 WY 32 (Wyo. 2020)   Cited 6 times   1 Legal Analyses

    [¶9] Mr. Garza does not dispute the facts in this case, but instead contends that his respectful refusal to comply with a search warrant is not the type of verbal conduct that can constitute interference with a peace officer. In support, he points to our decision in Matthews v. State , 2014 WY 54, 322 P.3d 1279 (Wyo. 2014). In Matthews , the defendant entered a conditional guilty plea by which he preserved three issues for review, including the question of whether his refusal to comply with a search warrant after being arrested for driving under the influence could constitute interference with a peace officer.

  2. Brown v. State

    2017 WY 45 (Wyo. 2017)   Cited 9 times

    A valid conditional plea requires that the parties make a reservation of the right to appeal a specific issue in writing; that the state consent to the conditional plea; that the trial court approve the conditional plea; and, finally, that the appellate court decision be dispositive, either by allowing the plea to stand or by reversing the district court decision in such a way that the charges will effectively be dismissed. Matthews v. State , 2014 WY 54, ¶ 15, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 (Wyo. 2014). [¶10] The State argues that two of the three remaining issues asserted by Mrs. Brown in this appeal are not dispositive and thus her plea was not valid and her appeal must be dismissed and the case remanded for the entry of another plea or a trial.

  3. Hardman v. State

    2018 WY 24 (Wyo. 2018)   Cited 3 times

    [¶3] W.R.Cr.P. 11(a)(2) requires: 1) the parties to make a reservation of the right to appeal a specific issue in writing, 2) the State's consent, and 3) the trial court's approval. Matthews v. State , 2014 WY 54, ¶ 15, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 (Wyo. 2014) (citing Walters v. State , 2008 WY 159, ¶¶ 14-15, 197 P.3d 1273, 1277 (Wyo. 2008) ). These three requirements were met, and the specific issues are identified in the district court's order, which was approved as to form by both parties.

  4. Woods v. State

    2023 WY 32 (Wyo. 2023)   Cited 2 times
    Discussing officers still need a warrant or an exception to the warrant requirement under the Fourth Amendment to enter a suspect's home to effectuate an arrest

    We afford no deference to the prior courts' conclusions of law. See Best v. Best, 2015 WY 133, ¶ 7, 357 P.3d 1149, 1151 (Wyo. 2015); Mathews v. State, 2014 WY 54, ¶¶ 1, 12, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 (Wyo. 2014) (reversing a district court's order affirming the defendant's conviction in circuit court); see also Bear Cloud v. State, 2013 WY 18, ¶¶ 13-14, 294 P.3d 36, 40 (Wyo. 2013) (citation omitted).

  5. Barney v. State

    2022 WY 49 (Wyo. 2022)   Cited 5 times
    In Barney, we held a lapse of two hours was not substantial and that the temporal proximity factor weighed in favor of suppression. Id.

    [¶23] Neither party challenges the validity of Mr. Barney's conditional guilty plea, which requires (1) reservation of the right to appeal a specific issue in writing, (2) the State's consent, (3) the district court's approval, and (4) reservation of a dispositive issue. W.R.Cr.P. 11(a)(2); Robinson v. State, 2019 WY 125, ¶ 12, 454 P.3d 149, 155 (Wyo. 2019) (citing Matthews v. State, 2014 WY 54, ¶ 15, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 (Wyo. 2014)). An issue is not dispositive unless reversal would require dismissal of the charges or suppression of the evidence necessary for conviction.

  6. Robinson v. State

    2019 WY 125 (Wyo. 2019)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Robinson v. State, 454 P.3d 149 (Wyo. 2019), the Court stated that "there are various ways a law enforcement officer can develop reasonable suspicion that a vehicle is following too closely."

    [¶12] Under Rule 11(a)(2), reservation of the right to appeal a specific issue must be in writing, the State must consent to the plea, the district court must approve the plea, and the issue reserved must be dispositive. Matthews v. State, 2014 WY 54, ¶ 15, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 (Wyo. 2014). Although the rule requires the reservation be in writing, we recognized in Walters v. State, 2008 WY 159, ¶ 14, 197 P.3d 1273, 1277 (Wyo. 2008) :

  7. Guty v. State

    425 P.3d 1002 (Wyo. 2018)

    [¶2] We have explained that a valid conditional plea contains four elements. Matthews v. State , 2014 WY 54, ¶ 15, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 (Wyo. 2014). The existence of the first three elements is undisputed.

  8. Stowe v. State

    2014 WY 97 (Wyo. 2014)   Cited 3 times

    Nevertheless, we remind the criminal bar that strict compliance with Rule 11(a)(2) is the best practice. Matthews v. State, 2014 WY 54, ¶ 15 n. 1, 322 P.3d 1279, 1281 n. 1 (Wyo.2014). [¶ 12] The court accepted the plea agreement and Stowe's plea and sentenced her to imprisonment for a term of nineteen to twenty-four months.