Inga v. State, 011619 AKCA, A-12593
|Opinion Judge:||WOLLENBERG Judge|
|Party Name:||COSTIA INGA III, Appellant, v. STATE OF ALASKA, Appellee.|
|Attorney:||Maureen E. Dey, Gazewood & Weiner, P.C., Fairbanks, under contract with the Office of Public Advocacy, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Nancy R. Simel, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Criminal Appeals, Anchorage, and Jahna Lindemuth, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.|
|Judge Panel:||Before: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, and Allard and Wollenberg, Judges.|
|Case Date:||January 16, 2019|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of Alaska|
UNPUBLISHED See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d)
Appeal from the Superior Court, Third Judicial District, No. 3KO-13-506 CI Kodiak, Steve Cole, Judge.
Maureen E. Dey, Gazewood & Weiner, P.C., Fairbanks, under contract with the Office of Public Advocacy, Anchorage, for the Appellant.
Nancy R. Simel, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Criminal Appeals, Anchorage, and Jahna Lindemuth, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.
Before: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, and Allard and Wollenberg, Judges.
Costia Inga III appeals the superior court's dismissal of his application for post-conviction relief. For the reasons explained in this opinion, we affirm the court's dismissal of his application.
In 2012, Inga was on felony probation and parole for a sexual assault conviction, and he was living in his father's house in the village of Akhiok on Kodiak Island.1 Inga's probation/parole officer asked the state troopers to conduct a home visit. During their visit, the troopers discovered numerous firearms, including at least three handguns, one of which was found in Inga's bedroom and another of which had his fingerprint on it.
Because Inga was a felon, the State indicted him on two counts of third-degree misconduct involving weapons. At the grand jury proceeding, the State explained that both counts were based on Inga's possession of the same handgun, but each count alleged a different legal theory: first, that Inga knowingly possessed a firearm capable of being concealed on one's person; and second, that Inga resided in a dwelling knowing that the dwelling contained a firearm capable of being concealed on one's person.2Based on these charges, the State also filed a petition to revoke Inga's probation in the sexual assault case, in which he had approximately 4 years of suspended jail time that could be imposed.
The parties negotiated a resolution to the weapons charges and the petition to revoke probation. The State dismissed one count of weapons misconduct and Inga pleaded guilty to the other, and he received a stipulated sentence of 2 years to serve. Inga also admitted that he violated his probation, and the State agreed that he would be returned to probation with no suspended time imposed.
Inga 's application for post-conviction relief
Inga timely filed a pro se application for post-conviction relief related to the weapons misconduct case. In his application (as amended with the assistance of counsel), Inga alleged that his trial attorney in the weapons misconduct case had provided ineffective assistance. Inga argued that his attorney should have filed a motion to suppress the items seized during the home visit because (according to Inga) a parole search of his residence for weapons bore no direct relationship to his sexual assault conviction and was therefore invalid. Inga did not attach the judgment from his prior sexual assault conviction or a copy of his parole or probation conditions, nor did he detail his criminal history. Inga also asserted that his trial attorney should have filed a motion to dismiss the grand jury indictment on the theory that indicting him on two counts for possession of the same handgun violated the guarantee against double jeopardy.
As part of his post-conviction relief application, Inga filed an affidavit from his former attorney. In this affidavit, the attorney asserted that the State's plea offer had been contingent on...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP