Champion v. State, 031920 OKCRI, C-2019-414

Docket Nº:C-2019-414
Opinion Judge:LEWIS, PRESIDING JUDGE
Party Name:VICTOR CHAMPION, Petitioner v. THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Respondent.
Attorney:SOFIA JOHNSON, BRIAN MARTIN ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT DANNY JOSEPH ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT HEATHER ANDERSON ASST. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ATTORNEY FOR THE STATE
Judge Panel:KUEHN, V.P.J., LUMPKIN, J., HUDSON, J., ROWLAND, J. Concur.
Case Date:March 19, 2020
Court:Court of Appeals of Oklahoma, Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
 
FREE EXCERPT

2020 OK CR 8

VICTOR CHAMPION, Petitioner

v.

THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Respondent.

No. C-2019-414

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

March 19, 2020

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY THE HONORABLE CLIFFORD SMITH, DISTRICT JUDGE

SOFIA JOHNSON, BRIAN MARTIN ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

DANNY JOSEPH ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

HEATHER ANDERSON ASST. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ATTORNEY FOR THE STATE

OPINION

LEWIS, PRESIDING JUDGE

¶1 Victor Champion, Petitioner, pled guilty to Count 1, first degree rape by instrumentation, in violation of 21 O.S.2011, § 1114 (A)(6); Count 2, financial abuse or exploitation of a vulnerable adult, in violation of 21 O.S.2011, § 843.3 (A); and Count 3, sexual battery, in violation of 21 O.S.Supp.2018, § 1123 (B), in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CF-2019-475. The Honorable Kelly Greenough, District Judge, found Petitioner guilty and sentenced him to concurrent terms of five (5) years imprisonment and a $600.00 fine in Count 1, two (2) years imprisonment and a $600.00 fine in Count 2, and five (5) years imprisonment and a $600.00 fine in Count 3, all suspended.

¶2 Petitioner filed a timely motion to withdraw the plea. He now seeks the writ of certiorari from the trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw the plea, in the following propositions of error: 1. The lack of factual basis renders a plea involuntary because the record does not show that there was a factual basis for the charges of rape by instrumentation or sexual battery. Therefore, it was plain error to refuse to let Mr. Champion withdraw his plea;

2. The trial court did not have authority to reinstate a guilty plea. Therefore, the order denying the motion to withdraw plea was a nullity;

3. The trial court did not hold the motion to withdraw hearing within 30 days. Therefore the trial court lost jurisdiction to hear the motion to withdraw plea;

4. A plea that is not knowingly made is not a valid plea. Therefore, it was plain error for the trial judge to not allow Mr. Champion to withdraw his plea;

5. Petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel both at the plea hearing and at the plea withdrawal hearing;

6. The accumulation of error in this case deprived petitioner of the due process of law in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article II, § 7 of the Oklahoma Constitution.

¶3 We review the trial court's ruling on a motion to withdraw a plea for an abuse of discretion...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP