From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. McMahon

Supreme Court of Nebraska
Apr 1, 1983
331 N.W.2d 818 (Neb. 1983)

Opinion

No. 82-284.

Filed April 1, 1983.

Pleas. A plea of guilty cannot be voluntary if the defendant is unaware of the penal consequences of such plea because of having been misinformed by the trial court and such plea must be vacated and the defendant rearraigned.

Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: DONALD J. HAMILTON, Judge. Reversed and remanded.

Thomas M. Kenney, Douglas County Public Defender, and Bennett G. Hornstein, for appellant.

Paul L. Douglas, Attorney General, and G. Roderic Anderson, for appellee.

KRIVOSHA, C.J., BOSLAUGH, McCOWN, WHITE, HASTINGS, and CAPORALE, JJ., and COLWELL, D.J., Retired.


Following a plea of guilty, Daniel J. McMahon was convicted of the crime of delivering marijuana, a violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-416(1)(a) and (2)(b), and 28-405, Schedule I (c)(10) (Cum. Supp. 1982), a Class III felony. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 3 nor more than 5 years. The defendant assigns as error on appeal that the District Court, in connection with the arraignment proceedings, misinformed him as to the possible penalty for the crime, i.e., that it included imprisonment of up to 5 years or a $10,000 fine, or both such fine and imprisonment, when in fact the correct penalty for a Class III felony was not less than 1 year nor more than 20 years or a $25,000 fine, or both such fine and imprisonment.

It is apparent that the actual maximum penalty imposed on the defendant was within the limitation erroneously stated by the trial court. He therefore suffered no prejudice in that regard. However, the minimum portion of the indeterminate sentence, 3 years, exceeded by 16 months that which the court could have imposed had its advice to the defendant of the limitation of "up to five years" been correct. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 83-1,105(1) (Reissue 1981). We cannot order a reduction of the minimum sentence to 20 months because it was a permissible sentence for a Class III felony.

What we are here faced with is a situation in which the defendant was unaware of the penal consequences of his guilty plea because he had been misinformed by the court, and therefore his plea could hardly be said to have been voluntary. State v. Turner, 186 Neb. 424, 183 N.W.2d 763 (1971). In State v. Curnyn, 202 Neb. 135, 274 N.W.2d 157 (1979), after directing a hearing on the issue of whether the defendant had knowledge of the applicable penalties, we said: "If the court finds he was not aware of the penal consequences of the plea, the judgment of conviction shall be deemed vacated and he shall be permitted to plead again." Id. at 140-41, 274 N.W.2d at 161.

The judgment and sentence of the District Court are reversed and vacated and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.


Summaries of

State v. McMahon

Supreme Court of Nebraska
Apr 1, 1983
331 N.W.2d 818 (Neb. 1983)
Case details for

State v. McMahon

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE, v. DANIEL J. McMAHON, APPELLANT

Court:Supreme Court of Nebraska

Date published: Apr 1, 1983

Citations

331 N.W.2d 818 (Neb. 1983)
331 N.W.2d 818

Citing Cases

State v. Williams

If the defendant elects to withdraw his plea, the trial court shall hold an evidentiary hearing to determine…

State v. Van Ackeren

Since Van Ackeren was unaware of the total potential penal consequences of the plea agreement, his pleas of…