 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Higgins v. State3/29/2000
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
[No. 4196- March 29, 2000]
Appeal from the Superior Court, Third Judicial District, Palmer, Eric Smith, Judge.
In November 1995, an Alaska state trooper attempted to perform a traffic stop of a vehicle driven by Scott A. Higgins. Higgins fled from the officer. During the ensuing chase, Higgins rammed two patrol cars, placing their drivers in fear of injury. Based on these events, Higgins was indicted on two counts of third-degree assault and two counts of second-degree criminal mischief. He was also charged with misdemeanor driving while intoxicated.
These charges were resolved when Higgins reached a plea agreement with the State. He pleaded no contest to one count of assault, one count of criminal mischief, and the DWI. For the two felonies, the superior court sentenced Higgins to a composite term of 5 years' imprisonment with 2 years suspended, and placed Higgins on probation for 10 years. At the sentencing hearing, the parties agreed to resolve the issue of restitution later. The superior court ultimately ordered Higgins to pay restitution to the State of Alaska in the amount of $12,189.26.
Several months after his sentencing, Higgins filed a petition for post-conviction relief in which he asserted that he should be allowed to withdraw his plea. He argued that his sentence was flawed because the superior court placed him on probation, and also because the superior court did not hold a hearing before ordering Higgins to pay restitution. The superior court dismissed this petition, ruling that Higgins's claims were meritless.
Higgins now appeals the dismissal of his petition. He asserts that his petition contains allegations which, if true, would establish his right to post-conviction relief. He alternatively asserts that even if his petition is deficient, he should have been given an opportunity to amend it. For the reasons explained here, we affirm the superior court's decision to dismiss Higgins's petition for post-conviction relief.
The procedural history of this litigation, and an explanation of Higgins's attacks on his sentence
As recited above, Higgins agreed to plead no contest to two felony charges - third-degree assault and second-degree criminal mischief - and the misdemeanor offense of DWI. He was sentenced to serve 3 years in prison, and an additional term of 2 years was suspended on condition of his good behavior during 10 years' probation. Higgins was also ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $12,189.26.
Several months after he was sentenced, Higgins filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus (which the superior court treated as a petition for post-conviction relief).
In this petition, Higgins contended that two facets of his sentence were illegal. First, Higgins argued that the superior court lacked the authority to place him on probation for more than 5 years. Second, Higgins argued that the superior court was obliged to hold a hearing before imposing restitution - a hearing to determine the true amount of the State's loss as well as Higgins's ability to pay restitution.
The State moved to dismiss Higgins's petition because it failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Criminal Rule 35.1. While the State's motion was pending, Higgins filed a second pleading - a motion to withdraw his plea.
In his plea-withdrawal motion, Higgins reiterated his previous attacks on his sentence, but he now robed them in different legal garb. Higgins argued that, because the superior court had given him an illegally long period of probation, and because the court had imposed restitution without affording h
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|