 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Stuart9/18/1990
nd.
Defendant's Admissions to Prior Convictions
Finally, Stuart argues that the trial court failed to comply with Rule 17.2, Ariz. R. Crim. P., 17 A.R.S., before accepting Stuart's admission that he had been previously convicted of DUI on two occasions.
Because this involves a question of law, our standard of review is de novo. Tovrea Land & Cattle Co., supra ; Thomas, supra. Rule 17.6 requires that a defendant's admission of a prior conviction be obtained in accordance with Rule 17 unless the admission occurs while the defendant is testifying. Rule 17.2, read in conjunction with Rule 17.6, requires that before the trial court may accept a defendant's admission of a prior conviction, it must first advise the defendant of the nature of the allegation, the effect which the prior conviction may have on the defendant's sentence, and the defendant's right to require the state to proceed to trial with appointed counsel regarding the prior convictions. The trial court informed Stuart of the nature of the allegations of prior convictions and asked Stuart whether he had in fact previously been convicted of those two offenses. The record, however, does not indicate that the trial court advised Stuart beforehand of the consequences of admitting those convictions. Stuart's admissions were apparently taken in violation of Rule 17. We therefore remand this matter to
the trial court for a hearing to determine whether Stuart was aware of the actual range of sentence that could result from his admission of prior convictions. If Stuart knew from any source that admission of the priors could lead to a sentence of six years, the sentence is affirmed. If it is determined that he did not know, he must be given the opportunity to withdraw his admissions and have a jury trial regarding the prior convictions. State v. Nieto, 118 Ariz. 603, 609, 578 P.2d 1032, 1038 (App. 1978); Rule 17, Ariz. R. Crim. P., 17 A.R.S.
For the reasons set forth above, the defendant's convictions are affirmed but we remand regarding the prior convictions. We have searched the record for fundamental error and, other than as mentioned, have found none.
Page 1 2 3 4 Arizona DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|