 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Fields12/14/2000
the terms of the agreement were no longer binding and, at that point in time, the State had "good cause" for filing a belated notice of intent to seek persistent felony offender status. The District Court agreed.
9 In challenging the existence of good cause, Fields argues that " owhere in the Plea Agreement did the State promise not to seek a persistent felony offender status. Therefore, the District Court's order to allow the State to seek Persistent Felony Offender status could not have been based on 'good cause.' " Fields seems to argue that, had the promise not to seek persistent felony offender status been contained in the written plea agreement, he would have honored the agreement rather than opt for a jury trial.
10 We find Fields' argument lacking in logic. The plea agreement provides that, in consideration of Fields' entry of a plea of guilty to the charge of felony theft, "the County Attorney agrees to recommend a seven (7) year suspended sentence" and to dismiss the charge of driving under the influence of alcohol. Further, the agreement provides that " o additional promises, agreements or conditions have been entered into other than those set forth in this plea agreement." The terms of the agreement, as spelled out above, obligated the State to recommend a specific sentence and no other. That sentence was a suspended sentence of seven years. By omitting any reference to persistent felony offender status, the agreement precluded the State from seeking that designation. We find no merit to Fields' contention that, due to the alleged incomplete nature of the agreement, he was put at risk of being designated a persistent felony offender and was thus justified in repudiating the agreement.
11 The District Court correctly concluded that, under § 46-13-108, MCA, there was "good cause" for allowing the State to file its intent to seek persistent felony offender status when Fields, after the omnibus hearing, decided not to follow through with the plea agreement.
12 Affirmed.
W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
We concur:
JIM REGNIER
JAMES C. NELSON
TERRY N. TRIEWEILER
KARLA M. GRAY
|