Ralph v. Commonwealth

Decision Date10 May 2022
Docket Number0826-21-1
PartiesALLEN JAMAL RALPH v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CourtVirginia Court of Appeals

From the Circuit Court of the City of Hampton Michael A. Gaten Judge

Charles E. Haden for appellant.

Justin B. Hill, Assistant Attorney General (Jason S. Miyares Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Present: Judges Beales, AtLee and Chaney Argued at Norfolk, Virginia

MEMORANDUM OPINION [*]

RANDOLPH A. BEALES, JUDGE

On October 26, 2020, Allen Jamal Ralph pled guilty to three counts of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, one count of robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery. Consistent with the written plea agreement, the Circuit Court of the City of Hampton sentenced Ralph to a total of fifty-three years of incarceration with thirty-eight years suspended. In this appeal, Ralph argues that the trial court erred in accepting his guilty pleas and abused its discretion in sentencing him according to the terms of the plea agreement.

I. Background

At a hearing on the entry of Ralph's guilty pleas, the Commonwealth proffered that if the case had proceeded to trial, the evidence would have shown that Ralph and two other men devised a plan to rob a GameStop store in Hampton. The evidence showed that Ralph agreed to serve as the getaway driver and drove the three of them to the Hampton GameStop location.

When they arrived, Ralph drove the car around the parking lot of the shopping center and parked in different spaces to survey the store. The two other men entered the store with a gun while Ralph stayed in the car. The armed perpetrators locked the manager of the GameStop and two customers inside the store and pointed the firearm at all three of the victims. They took personal property from all three victims, took money from the cash register, and forced the manager to open the safe.

Hampton police officers arrived and actually saw the robbery in progress. The officers pursued the robbers as they fled through the back door of the store. As the robbers ran, they dropped the gun and some items taken during the robbery. Eventually, they ran back out into the parking lot, where Ralph was still waiting to pick them up. All three were apprehended by police in the parking lot.

The Commonwealth and Ralph reached an agreement whereby Ralph agreed to plead guilty to three counts of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, one count of robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery. In exchange, the Commonwealth agreed to nolle prosequi several other charges, including indictments for abduction and additional counts of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. The written plea agreement memorialized the parties' j oint recommendation that Ralph receive a sentence of fifty-three years with thirty-eight years of that sentence suspended.

Before accepting the plea agreement, the trial court conducted a plea colloquy with Ralph. During the colloquy, Ralph stated that he fully understood the charges against him and that he fully understood what the Commonwealth would need to prove. Ralph also confirmed that he had consulted with his attorney and that they had discussed possible defenses to the charges. The trial judge asked, "Are you entering these pleas of guilty freely and voluntarily?" Ralph answered, "Yes, sir." The trial judge continued, "Are you entering these pleas of guilty because you are, in fact, guilty of the crimes charged?" Ralph responded, "Yes, sir."

Ralph assured the court that he had not taken any medications or substances and did not have any mental condition that prevented him from understanding the proceedings. He acknowledged that he was waiving his rights to plead not guilty and to have a trial. He confirmed that no one had forced or threatened him to enter his pleas and that no one had made any promises outside the written plea agreement. He stated that he understood everything in the plea agreement. He indicated that he understood all of the trial judge's questions, and he did not ask any questions of the trial court.

The trial court proceeded to sentence Ralph according to the parties' sentencing recommendation as set out in the plea agreement. Therefore, the trial court sentenced Ralph to fifty-three years of incarceration with thirty-eight years suspended-for an active sentence of fifteen years. This appeal followed.

II. Analysis

Ralph assigns two errors on appeal. He first contends that "[t]he trial court erred in accepting Ralph's pleas of guilty to five felony counts" because "Ralph did not enter voluntary, knowing, and intelligent pleas to the charges against him." Second, he argues, "The sentencing court abused its discretion in sentencing Ralph pursuant to a plea agreement to a total of 53 years in prison, with 38 years suspended, where there were significant mitigating circumstances to which the sentencing court failed to give proper weight."

A. Ralph's Guilty Pleas

Rule 5A:18 provides, "No ruling of the trial court or the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission will be considered as a basis for reversal unless an objection was stated with reasonable certainty at the time of the ruling, except for good cause shown or to enable this Court to attain the ends of justice." "The rule strives to ensure 'the trial court has an opportunity to rule intelligently on the issues presented, thus avoiding unnecessary appeals and reversals.'" Commonwealth v. Bass, 292 Va. 19, 26 (2016) (quoting Brown v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 210, 217 (2010)).

In this case, before the trial court accepted the plea agreement, the trial court conducted a thorough plea colloquy in accordance with Rule 3A:8 to determine the voluntariness of Ralph's pleas. See Rule 3A:8(b)(1) ("A circuit court may not accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a felony charge without first determining that the plea is made voluntarily with an understanding of the nature of the charge and the consequences of the plea."). Ralph asserts that the good cause exception to Rule 5A:18 applies here because he "had little opportunity to move for a withdrawal of his guilty pleas and didn't fully understand the consequences of his guilty pleas until it was too late to move for withdrawal of the pleas."

"The Court may only invoke the 'good cause' exception where an appellant did not have the opportunity to object to a ruling in the trial court; however, when an appellant 'had the opportunity to object but elected not to do so,' the exception does not apply." Perry v. Commonwealth, 58 Va.App. 655, 667 (2011) (emphasis added) (quoting Luck v. Commonwealth, 32 Va.App. 827, 834 (2000)). The extensive plea colloquy discussed supra demonstrates that the trial court afforded Ralph ample opportunity to object before his guilty pleas became final. Ralph could have objected during the October 26, 2020 hearing when the trial court accepted his guilty pleas, or he could have moved to withdraw his pleas for up to twenty-one days after the trial court entered its sentencing order. Code § 19.2-296. However, Ralph never indicated that there was any issue during the plea colloquy-and never moved to withdraw his guilty pleas at any point during the numerous days after the hearing while the trial court still retained jurisdiction over the matter. We therefore reject Ralph's contention that the good cause exception to Rule 5A:18 applies here.

Ralph also urges this Court to apply the ends of justice exception to Rule 5A:18. This Court "considers two questions when deciding whether to apply the ends of justice exception: (1) whether there is error as contended by the appellant; and (2) whether the failure to apply the ends of justice provision would result in a grave injustice." Williams v Commonwealth, 294 Va. 25, 27-28 (2017) (quoting Bass, 292 Va. at 27). "The 'ends of justice' exception to Rule 5A:18 is 'narrow and is to be used sparingly.'" Melick v. Commonwealth, 69 Va.App. 122, 146 (2018) (quoting Pearce v. Commonwealth, 53 Va.App....

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT