Gist v. State, No. 87-285
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming |
| Writing for the Court | Before CARDINE; THOMAS |
| Citation | 768 P.2d 1054 |
| Parties | Roger Maurice GIST, Appellant (Defendant), v. The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Plaintiff). |
| Docket Number | No. 87-285 |
| Decision Date | 24 February 1989 |
Page 1054
v.
The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Plaintiff).
Wyoming Public Defender Program: Leonard D. Munker, State Public Defender, Carol Serelson, Cheyenne, for appellant.
Joseph B. Meyer, Atty. Gen., John W. Renneisen, Deputy Atty. Gen., Gerald P. Luckhaupt, Paul Rehurek, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.
Before CARDINE, C.J., and THOMAS, URBIGKIT, MACY and GOLDEN, JJ.
THOMAS, Justice.
The question to be resolved in this case is whether the bright line rule that the court has adopted in direct appeals from convictions premised on pleas of guilty in which the trial court failed to assiduously follow the requirements of Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P., should be extended to cases in which the issue is raised by a petition for post-conviction relief. The district court ruled that the appellant, Roger Maurice Gist, failed to establish any basis for post-conviction relief, and it denied relief, dismissing the petition that Gist presented pursuant to §§ 7-14-101 to -108, W.S.1977. We agree that Gist is not entitled to relief under the statutory post-conviction procedure, and we affirm the ruling of the district court.
The single issue presented by Gist is stated in his brief as follows:
"Did the trial court err in the change of plea hearing because it did not comply with W.R.Cr.P. 15(c) and thus violate appellant's constitutional rights?"
Gist also suggests, in the alternative, that the court should treat several claims presented to the district court which were not briefed or argued in this court. The State of Wyoming sets forth the following issues:
Page 1055
"I. Has appellant waived the issue on this appeal for failure to raise it in the original or amended petition for post-conviction relief?
"II. Has appellant waived the issue on appeal by his failure to raise it on direct appeal?
"III. Are claimed violations of Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P., cognizable in Wyoming post-conviction relief?
"IV. Should this court consider the issues raised in the post-conviction petition since they are not supported by any cogent argument or pertinent authority on this appeal?
"V. Is there any merit to the issues raised in the post-conviction petition?"
We will not consider those claims which were presented to the trial court and adopted by reference but not briefed or argued in this court. This attempt to incorporate those issues in the appeal is contrary to Rule 5.01(2), W.R.A.P., and we treat with the single issue of failure to comply with Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P.
Gist was charged with two counts of aiding and abetting the delivery of marijuana in violation of § 35-7-1031(a), W.S.1977. A plea agreement was made with the prosecuting attorney, and Gist then entered a plea of guilty to the second count of the indictment in exchange for the dismissal of the first count. He was sentenced to serve one and one-half to three years in the Wyoming State Penitentiary. Gist did not appeal from his conviction.
Instead, he proceeded by means of a pro se petition for post-conviction relief in accordance with § 7-14-101, W.S.1977, in the district court. The court appointed counsel, and an amended petition was filed. In that petition, the district court was presented with a more expansive and general wording of this issue which framed the question as one of a substantial violation of Gist's constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Art. 1, § 6 of the Wyoming Constitution. The district court held that the petition did not establish a violation of these constitutional rights, and relief was denied. This appeal is taken from that ruling of the district court.
The State of Wyoming urges the concept of procedural waiver as a bar to relief for Gist. It is true that we have adopted a disciplined approach to post-conviction relief and have concluded that it is not to be invoked as a substitute for a direct appeal, nor should it be treated like a direct appeal. Cutbirth v. State, 751 P.2d 1257 (Wyo.1988); Pote v. State, 733 P.2d 1018 (Wyo.1987); Munoz v. Maschner, 590 P.2d 1352 (Wyo.1979)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duffy v. State, 87-160
...15, W.R.Cr.P., in order to demonstrate the validity of a plea of guilty and to avoid questions on post-conviction relief. Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054 (Wyo.1989). See Keller v. State, 723 P.2d 1244 (Wyo.1986); Crawford v. State, 701 P.2d 1150 (Wyo.1985). While we have required strict compli......
-
Martin v. State, 88-155
...to be no basis to question the proposition that Martin's plea of nolo contendere was voluntarily and knowingly entered. Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054 This court has ruled that a plea of nolo contendere, within the criminal context, is the same as a plea of guilty. State v. Steele, 620 P.2d 1......
-
Nixon v. State, 01-55.
...of constitutional magnitude and manifest a miscarriage of justice. Cutbirth; Wright v. State, 718 P.2d 35 (Wyo.1986). Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054, 1055 (Wyo.1989) (emphasis [¶ 27] We note, too, the societal interests at stake in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-40-204 (LexisNexis 2001), which provides ......
-
Dobbins v. State , s. S–11–0050
...of Rule 11(c), F.R.Cr.P. noting that our Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P., is substantially similar to the federal rule.” Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054, 1056 (Wyo.1989). Comment (b) to the Uniform Rule of Criminal Procedure, which parallels our Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P., states that the goal of this part o......
-
Duffy v. State, 87-160
...15, W.R.Cr.P., in order to demonstrate the validity of a plea of guilty and to avoid questions on post-conviction relief. Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054 (Wyo.1989). See Keller v. State, 723 P.2d 1244 (Wyo.1986); Crawford v. State, 701 P.2d 1150 (Wyo.1985). While we have required strict compli......
-
Martin v. State, 88-155
...to be no basis to question the proposition that Martin's plea of nolo contendere was voluntarily and knowingly entered. Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054 This court has ruled that a plea of nolo contendere, within the criminal context, is the same as a plea of guilty. State v. Steele, 620 P.2d 1......
-
Nixon v. State, 01-55.
...of constitutional magnitude and manifest a miscarriage of justice. Cutbirth; Wright v. State, 718 P.2d 35 (Wyo.1986). Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054, 1055 (Wyo.1989) (emphasis [¶ 27] We note, too, the societal interests at stake in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-40-204 (LexisNexis 2001), which provides ......
-
Dobbins v. State , s. S–11–0050
...of Rule 11(c), F.R.Cr.P. noting that our Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P., is substantially similar to the federal rule.” Gist v. State, 768 P.2d 1054, 1056 (Wyo.1989). Comment (b) to the Uniform Rule of Criminal Procedure, which parallels our Rule 15(c), W.R.Cr.P., states that the goal of this part o......