State v. Lashwood, No. 14812
| Court | Supreme Court of South Dakota |
| Writing for the Court | MORGAN; HENDERSON and WUEST, JJ., and HERTZ; FOSHEIM; SABERS |
| Citation | 384 N.W.2d 319 |
| Parties | STATE of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Sheryl LASHWOOD, Defendant and Appellant. . Considered on Briefs |
| Decision Date | 09 September 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 14812 |
Page 319
v.
Sheryl LASHWOOD, Defendant and Appellant.
Decided March 26, 1986.
John W. Bastian, Asst. Atty. Gen., Pierre, for plaintiff and appellee; Mark V. Meierhenry, Atty. Gen., Pierre, on brief.
Jeffrey D. Larson of Bleeker, Boldt & Koch, Woonsocket, for defendant and appellant.
MORGAN, Justice.
Defendant Sheryl Lashwood (Lashwood) appeals from a judgment and conviction on three counts of forgery, SDCL 22-39-36. We affirm the conviction.
The judgment of conviction arose when Lashwood entered pleas of nolo contendere to two counts of forgery and a plea of guilty to a third count of forgery, all pursuant to a plea bargain with the State. On appeal, she now raises due process questions regarding the acceptance of the pleas on three grounds: (1) That said pleas were not knowingly, voluntarily or intelligently made; (2) that the trial court failed to ascertain that there was sufficient factual basis to accept her pleas; and (3) that the trial court accepted her pleas five months after having informed her of her constitutional and statutory rights.
We deem it expedient to set up a chronological sequence of Lashwood's appearances in circuit court on this matter. All court appearances were held before the same circuit judge.
February 1, 1984 Arraigned on two counts of
forgery,advised of all legal
rights, hearing continued for
appointment of counsel.
February 6, 1984 Requested preliminary
hearing.
February 16, 1984 Preliminary hearing held,
Lashwood bound over.
Amended complaint filed with
one more count of forgery and
one count of burglary in the
second degree. Advised that
full legal rights previously
mentioned applied to new
counts.
February 21, 1984 Second preliminary hearing
held on last two counts,
Lashwood bound over.
Arraigned and entered plea of
not guilty and not guilty by
reason of insanity. Trial court
ordered psychiatric evaluation.
June 19, 1984 Arraigned on amended
information pursuant to plea
bargain, again advised of full
panoply of rights. Plea
bargain was discussed and
Lashwood entered a plea of
nolo contendere to two counts
of forgery and a plea of guilty
to a third count. Trial court
found her competent, found
that her plea was voluntary,
noted that the preliminary
hearing provided the factual
basis, and accepted her pleas.
September 5, 1984 * Sentencing hearing. Because
defense attorney
misunderstood the effect of
multiple pleas, trial court
allowed previous pleas to be
withdrawn and new attorney
appointed.
November 15, 1984 New pleas were entered per
bargain, i.e., nolo contendere
to two counts and a plea of
guilty to a third count of
forgery. The trial court asked
if she has any questions
regarding her rights as
previously explained to her. A
new sentencing hearing was
held.
November 19, 1984 Defendant was sentenced to
three years on each count, the
sentences to run consecutively.
One year of each sentence
would be suspended provided
defendant...To continue reading
Request your trial
12 practice notes
-
State v. Goodwin, No. 22574.
...must look to "the totality of the circumstances when ascertaining whether a plea was made knowingly and voluntarily." State v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319, 321 (S.D.1986). In examining the "totality of the circumstances" we have taken into consideration the following factors: the defendant's a......
-
State v. Bilben, No. 26782.
...State v. Apple, 2008 S.D. 120, ¶ 12, 759 N.W.2d 283, 288;State v. Goodwin, 2004 S.D. 75, ¶ 11, 681 N.W.2d 847, 852;State v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319, 321 (S.D.1986). Under the totality of the circumstances, “[i]n addition to the procedure and in-court colloquy, we look at other factors incl......
-
State v. Schulz, No. 15273
...is an issue never addressed by this court, even though we have examined the factual basis requirement several times. State v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319 (S.D.1986); Halverson v. State, 372 N.W.2d 463 (S.D.1985); Graham v. State, 328 N.W.2d 254 (S.D.1982); Gregory v. State, 325 N.W.2d 297 (S.D......
-
Butler v. State, No. 45S03-9502-PC-247
...Criminal Procedure, § 20.4(f), n. 118 (quoting Fed.R.Crim.P. 11, Advisory Committee Note) (1991); see also South Dakota v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319 (S.D.1986) (observing that purpose is to protect one who might not realize his conduct does not fall within scope of charge). inquiry into the ......
Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
-
State v. Goodwin, No. 22574.
...must look to "the totality of the circumstances when ascertaining whether a plea was made knowingly and voluntarily." State v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319, 321 (S.D.1986). In examining the "totality of the circumstances" we have taken into consideration the following factors: the defendant's a......
-
State v. Bilben, No. 26782.
...State v. Apple, 2008 S.D. 120, ¶ 12, 759 N.W.2d 283, 288;State v. Goodwin, 2004 S.D. 75, ¶ 11, 681 N.W.2d 847, 852;State v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319, 321 (S.D.1986). Under the totality of the circumstances, “[i]n addition to the procedure and in-court colloquy, we look at other factors incl......
-
State v. Schulz, No. 15273
...is an issue never addressed by this court, even though we have examined the factual basis requirement several times. State v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319 (S.D.1986); Halverson v. State, 372 N.W.2d 463 (S.D.1985); Graham v. State, 328 N.W.2d 254 (S.D.1982); Gregory v. State, 325 N.W.2d 297 (S.D......
-
Butler v. State, No. 45S03-9502-PC-247
...Criminal Procedure, § 20.4(f), n. 118 (quoting Fed.R.Crim.P. 11, Advisory Committee Note) (1991); see also South Dakota v. Lashwood, 384 N.W.2d 319 (S.D.1986) (observing that purpose is to protect one who might not realize his conduct does not fall within scope of charge). inquiry into the ......
Request a trial to view additional results