 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Prater4/4/2003
at he did not understand the effect of his prior appeal on his criminal history. The district judge ruled that even if Prater had not understood the status of his appeal, he did not consider that fact a valid reason to withdraw the plea.
At the time Prater entered into the plea agreement, he had been declared competent to stand trial by two different examinations. Although Prater was suffering from depression and anxiety about his case, he was found to be oriented to time, place, and person and capable of assisting in his own defense. Prater has presented no evidence or authority to this court in support of his contention that he lacked the mental capacity to enter into a plea agreement.
As for Prater's argument that he did not know the status of his appeal at the time he entered into the plea agreement and the impact of his prior offense on his criminal history, this court discussed a similar situation in State v. Ford, 23 Kan. App. 2d 248, 930 P.2d 1089 (1996), rev. denied 261 Kan. 1087 (1997).
In Ford, the defendant relied on information supplied by the prosecution that he had only one prior person felony on his record. Ford accepted the plea with the belief his crime and criminal history placed him in the presumptive probation grid block for sentencing. The PSI report, however, indicated Ford had two previous person felonies and a criminal history score of B.
Ford argued his plea was unintelligently made because he had relied on the representation of the prosecution as to his criminal history at that time. The Court of Appeals responded that " here is no recourse for a plea unintelligently made." 23 Kan. App. 2d at 252.
Applying the analysis of Ford, Prater has no recourse for the fact that he failed to take into consideration the effect of his appeal on his criminal history score. Prater knew he had been convicted of aggravated arson and that his case had been appealed. That he did not inquire into the status of his own appeal does not demonstrate good cause to withdraw the plea such that the district judge abused his discretion in refusing to allow it.
Affirmed.
|