State v. Heredia

23 Citing cases

  1. Steele v. State

    153 Idaho 783 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 1 times

    Because a guilty plea by a criminal defendant waives certain constitutional rights, due process requires that a defendant's plea be entered voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently. State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007) ; State v. Colyer, 98 Idaho 32, 34, 557 P.2d 626, 628 (1976) ; Hayes v. State, 146 Idaho 353, 355, 195 P.3d 712, 714 (Ct.App.2008). Accord McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 466, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 1170–71, 22 L.Ed.2d 418, 425 (1969).

  2. State v. Flowers

    249 P.3d 367 (Idaho 2011)   Cited 33 times
    In Flowers, the defendant challenged the process of his plea agreement because the PSI and prosecutor "referred to facts relating to the dismissed charges."

    Id. A showing of manifest injustice is necessary in order to withdraw a guilty plea after sentencing. "A motion to withdraw a guilty plea brought after sentencing will only be granted to correct manifest injustice." State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007). 1. Defendant must show manifest injustice.

  3. State v. Shook

    144 Idaho 858 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 8 times

    Idaho Criminal Rule 11 became effective in 1980, two years after the Flummer decision. It provides in part: "Before a plea of guilty is accepted, the record of the entire proceedings, including reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, must show: . . . (2) the defendant was informed of the consequences of the plea, including minimum and maximum punishments, and other direct consequences which may apply." This rule was applied by the Idaho Supreme Court in State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 156 P.3d 1193 (2007). There, the defendant pleaded guilty to involuntary vehicular manslaughter and, pursuant to statute, was ordered to pay child support to the victim's minor children.

  4. State v. Sunseri

    165 Idaho 9 (Idaho 2018)   Cited 14 times
    Ruling whether defendant has credibly asserted legal innocence is a factor for consideration

    Id . "Manifest injustice will be found if the plea was not taken in compliance with the constitutional due process standards requiring that a guilty plea be entered into voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently." State v. Heredia , 144 Idaho 95, 98, 156 P.3d 1193, 1196 (2007) (citing State v. Huffman , 137 Idaho 886, 887, 55 P.3d 879, 880 (Ct. App. 2002) ). The decision in State v. Hanslovan , 147 Idaho 530, 211 P.3d 775 (Ct. App. 2008), demonstrates the proper analysis of a motion to withdraw a plea prior to sentencing.

  5. State v. Umphenour

    160 Idaho 503 (Idaho 2016)   Cited 6 times
    Ruling whether plea is voluntary turns on: whether defendant understood nature of charges and was not coerced; whether defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his rights to jury trial, to confront his accusers, and to refrain from incriminating himself; and whether defendant understood the consequences of pleading guilty

    This constitutes manifest injustice permitting withdrawal of the plea. State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007) (citing State v. Huffman, 137 Idaho 886, 887, 55 P.3d 879, 880 (Ct.App.2002) ). The seminal case in Idaho regarding this subject is State v. Colyer, 98 Idaho 32, 557 P.2d 626 (1976), cited by the Court.

  6. State v. McEvoy

    Docket No. 43769 (Idaho Ct. App. Dec. 13, 2016)

    Here, we do not need to address whether McEvoy's guilty plea required a waiver of his Fourth Amendment rights and whether such a waiver was a direct or collateral consequence, since the order granting a presentence review of McEvoy's property did not arise as a direct result of McEvoy's guilty plea. Idaho courts consider the question of "other direct consequences" from I.C.R. 11(c)(2) only when the guilty plea results in immediate consequences. In State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 156 P.3d 1193 (2006), Heredia pleaded guilty to vehicular manslaughter, which subjects individuals by statute to a possible punishment of paying child support to the victim's children. Id. at 97, 156 P.3d at 1195.

  7. State v. Bates

    Docket No. 40082 (Idaho Ct. App. Feb. 13, 2015)

    Id. A motion to withdraw a guilty plea brought after sentencing will be granted only to correct manifest injustice. State v. Flowers, 150 Idaho 568, 571, 249 P.3d 367, 370 (2011); State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007). The stricter standard after sentencing is justified to ensure that the accused is not encouraged to plead guilty to test the weight of potential punishment and withdraw the plea if the sentence were unexpectedly severe.

  8. State v. Thomas

    297 P.3d 268 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 7 times
    In Thomas, we held that the court's misstatement of the maximum sentence in a plea colloquy was not manifest injustice where the court in fact imposed a sentence within the range described during the colloquy.

    Id. A motion to withdraw a guilty plea brought after sentencing will be granted only to correct manifest injustice. State v. Flowers, 150 Idaho 568, 571, 249 P.3d 367, 370 (2011); State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007). If a plea was not taken in compliance with constitutional due process standards, which require that a guilty plea be made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently, then “manifest injustice” or the lower standard of “just reason” will be established as a matter of law.

  9. State v. Thomas

    154 Idaho 305 (Idaho Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 2 times

    A motion to withdraw a guilty plea brought after sentencing will be granted only to correct manifest injustice. State v. Flowers, 150 Idaho 568, 571, 249 P.3d 367, 370 (2011) ; State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007). If a plea was not taken in compliance with constitutional due process standards, which require that a guilty plea be made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently, then "manifest injustice" or the lower standard of "just reason" will be established as a matter of law. Heredia, 144 Idaho at 97, 156 P.3d at 1195; State v. Stone, 147 Idaho 330, 333, 208 P.3d 734, 737 (Ct.App.2009) ; State v. Shook, 144 Idaho 858, 859, 172 P.3d 1133, 1134 (Ct.App.2007) ; State v. Huffman, 137 Idaho 886, 887, 55 P.3d 879, 880 (Ct.App.2002).

  10. Steele v. State

    291 P.3d 466 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 5 times
    Noting that at Steele's sentencing hearing, the district court stated, "The most problematic of all of this is the fact that you simply are not accepting responsibility for your conduct."

    Because a guilty plea by a criminal defendant waives certain constitutional rights, due process requires that a defendant's plea be entered voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently. State v. Heredia, 144 Idaho 95, 97, 156 P.3d 1193, 1195 (2007); State v. Colyer, 98 Idaho 32, 34, 557 P.2d 626, 628 (1976); Hayes v. State, 146 Idaho 353, 355, 195 P.3d 712, 714 (Ct.App.2008). Accord McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 466, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 1170–71, 22 L.Ed.2d 418, 425 (1969).