848 P.2d 1060 (Nev. 1993), 22262, Mitchell v. State

Docket Nº:22262.
Citation:848 P.2d 1060, 109 Nev. 137
Party Name:Paula Mae MITCHELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
Case Date:March 18, 1993
Court:Supreme Court of Nevada

Page 1060

848 P.2d 1060 (Nev. 1993)

109 Nev. 137

Paula Mae MITCHELL, Appellant,


The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.

No. 22262.

Supreme Court of Nevada.

March 18, 1993.

[109 Nev. 138] Patricia M. Erickson, Las Vegas, for appellant.

Frankie Sue Del Papa, Atty. Gen., Carson City, Rex Bell, Dist. Atty. and James Tufteland, Deputy Dist. Atty., Las Vegas, for respondent.



On April 27, 1990, appellant Paula Mae Mitchell was arrested at an apartment complex by an officer of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. In his arrest report, the officer stated:

Upon arrival I found a female subject, who verbally identified herself as Paula M. Mitchell.... The residents, Brandon Page and Kathryn Lovejoy were detaining Mitchell. Page said that he and Lovejoy were asleep and woke up when they heard some coins jingling on the counter. They found Mitchell in the apartment and detained her until I arrived.

Mitchell then stated that she was the maid for the apartment complex. She said that she was sorry for entering the apartment and that she shouldn't have done it. She said that she had been walking past the apartment window and saw some change and a pack of cigarettes laying on the counter. She then entered the apartment with her maids [sic] master key and was caught when the resident woke up.

The state charged appellant in a criminal complaint with one count of burglary. At the preliminary hearing, the deputy public [109 Nev. 139] defender representing appellant informed the justice of the peace that the case had been negotiated, and that appellant had agreed to plead guilty to one count of attempted burglary. On August 7, 1990, the state filed an amended information charging appellant with one count of attempted burglary. At appellant's arraignment on August 7, 1990, the district court questioned appellant extensively about her understanding of the charge and the voluntariness with which she entered her plea. At the end of the arraignment, the district court accepted appellant's plea of guilty.

Prior to sentencing, on November 20, 1990, appellant filed a motion through counsel to withdraw her guilty plea. Attached to the motion was an affidavit of defense counsel in which counsel stated that immediately after appellant entered her plea, she notified counsel that she had misunderstood the negotiations and did not understand that...

To continue reading