State of Delaware v. Shorts. ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •       IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    )
    STATE OF DELAWARE                    )
    )     I.D. No. 1405001074
    v.                             )
    )
    JERRY SHORTS,                        )
    )
    Defendant.         )
    Submitted: November 30, 2015
    Decided: December 1, 2015
    On Defendant’s Amended Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea.
    DENIED.
    ORDER
    Sonia Augusthy, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice,
    Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for the State.
    T. Andrew Rosen, Esquire, Assistant Public Defender, Office of the Public
    Defender, Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for Defendant.
    COOCH, R.J.
    This 1st day of December, 2015, upon consideration of Defendant’s
    Amended Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea, it appears to the Court that:
    1.    On May 2, 2014, Jerry Shorts (“Defendant”) was arrested and charged
    with Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child in violation of 
    11 Del. C
    . §
    776, and four counts of Sexual Abuse of a Child First Degree in
    violation of 
    11 Del. C
    . § 778. On February 23, 2015, Defendant
    entered a guilty plea to an amended charge of Rape Fourth Degree.
    2.     On October 27, 2015, Defendant, through counsel, filed an Amended
    Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea (“Motion”). 1 Defendant states that:
    [a]t [the] case review on November 24, 2014, Defendant accepted
    a plea to Rape 4 before the Honorable Richard R. Cooch rather
    than risk a worse outcome at trial based on circumstantial
    evidence.
    During the PSI, Investigative Services asked the victim if the
    Defendant had any identifying marks (information not requested
    by the investigating officer). The victim mentioned a mole but
    could not recall the location (Defendant has a mole on his
    shoulder that would have been visible under normal
    circumstances). Defendant suffers from server psoriasis [on his
    genitalia] which has been confirmed both visually and through
    medical records which Defendant suggests would certainly have
    been visible during the type of contact the victim alleges.
    Previously, this information would only have been available to
    defense through cross-examination. Defendant indicates that if he
    had that information at the time of the plea he would not have
    accepted the State’s offer.
    Defendant asserts that it could not be a knowing, intelligent and
    voluntary plea if a material fact in the case was not known to him
    or defense counsel at the time of the plea. 2
    3.     ‘“The decision whether or not to permit a defendant to withdraw a
    guilty plea is within the sound discretion of the trial court.’” 3 The
    Court may grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea for any fair and just
    reason.4 In evaluating whether any fair and just reason exists to allow a
    defendant to withdraw his guilty plea, the Court will weigh five factors:
    (1) Was there a procedural defect with the plea;
    1
    Defendant filed his original Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea on September 3, 2015. The
    amended Motion filed in October mirrors the original Motion, and includes additional details in
    support of the Motion. At a conference held on November 16, 2015, counsel for Defendant
    stated that he was content to have the Amended Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea decided on the
    present record.
    2
    Def’s. Am. Mot. to Withdraw Guilty Plea ¶¶ 2-4 (emphasis in original).
    3
    State v. Phillips, 
    2007 WL 3105749
    at* 1 (Del. Super. Sept. 20, 2007) (quoting Brown v. State,
    
    250 A.2d 503
    , 504 (Del. 1969)).
    4
    Super. Ct. Crim. R. 32(d).
    2
    (2) Whether the defendant knowingly and voluntarily consented
    to the plea agreement;
    (3) Whether there is a present basis for the defendant to assert
    legal innocence;
    (4) Did the defendant have adequate legal counsel during the
    proceedings; and
    (5) Will granting the motion prejudice the State or unduly
    inconvenience the Court.5
    4.     “Only where the judge determines that ‘the plea was not voluntarily
    entered or was entered because of misapprehension or mistake of
    defendant as to his legal rights’ should the judge grant the defendant’s
    request to withdraw his guilty plea.”6 “A defendant’s statements to the
    Superior Court during the guilty plea colloquy are presumed to be
    truthful.”7 The burden is on the defendant to show that a plea was not
    entered into voluntarily. 8
    5.     On February 23, 2015, Defendant signed the Guilty Plea form and
    Plea Agreement and entered into athorough colloquy with this Court.
    As part of his plea agreement, Defendant agreed to plead guilty to one
    count of an amended charge of Rape Fourth Degree in violation of 
    11 Del. C
    . § 770. Defendant also agreed to have no contact with the
    victim and have a pre-sentence investigation conducted. During his
    plea colloquy, Defendant was asked, among other things,:
    THE COURT: Are you Jerry Shorts?
    THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
    THE COURT: Did you sign the guilty plea form after reviewing
    it carefully with your attorney, Mr. Rosen?
    5
    Scarborough v. State, 
    938 A.2d 644
    , 649 (Del. 2007) (citing Patterson v. State, 
    684 A.2d 1234
    ,
    1239 (Del. 1996)).
    6
    
    Id. at 650
    (quoting State v. Insley, 
    141 A.2d 619
    , 622 (Del. 1958).
    7
    Somerville v. State, 
    703703 A.2d 629
    , 632 (Del. 1997).
    8
    
    Id. 3 THE
    DEFENDANT: Yes, sir . . . .
    THE COURT: Has your lawyer, the State or anyone threatened
    or forced you to enter this plea?
    THE DEFENDANT: No, sir.
    THE COURT: Do you understand that because you are pleading
    guilty, you will not have a trial and you, therefore, waive or give
    up certain constitutional rights?
    THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
    THE COURT: Do you understand that those constitutional rights
    include . . . [the right] to hear and question the witness against
    you?
    THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir . . . .
    THE COURT: Do you believe that you are knowingly,
    voluntarily, and intelligently entering a plea of guilty to this
    charge?
    THE DEFENDANT: Yes.
    THE COURT: Do you understand that what’s being done today
    is final, meaning that you will not be able to come back at any
    later time to seek to withdraw your guilty plea?
    THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. 9
    6.      Defendant cannot show the first or second factors. During the plea
    colloquy, Defendant acknowledged that he reviewed the plea
    agreement with his attorney. He stated that his decision was not
    threatened or forced and he acknowledged that he understood he was
    giving up certain constitutional rights. Specifically, Defendant stated
    that he recognized the fact that he was giving up the right to “hear and
    question witnesses against [him].” Defendant also stated that he
    understood that his entry of a guilty plea was final and he would not
    be permitted to withdraw that plea at a later time.
    9
    Tr. of Plea Hr’g at 4, 5, 6, 9.
    4
    7.     Similarly, Defendant has failed to demonstrate the third factor,
    weighing whether the defendant is now able to assert his innocence.
    Defendant has not shown that he actually has psoriasis, when he
    contracted the aliment, or that he was experiencing a “flare up” at a
    time that would have allowed the victim to notice it. 10
    8.     Defendant is also unable to demonstrate the fourth factor. His
    attorney was competent in negotiating a successful plea agreement
    and reductions in both his sentencing risk and sex offender tier. “[A]t
    [the] case review on November 24, 2014, Defendant accepted a plea
    to Rape 4 before the Honorable Richard R. Cooch rather than risk a
    worse outcome at trial based on circumstantial evidence.” 11
    9.     Finally, the State and Court would likely be prejudiced by allowing
    Defendant to withdraw his guilty plea. The State need not show that it
    would suffer any prejudice when a defendant is unable to demonstrate
    the other factors.12 The Court would be unduly inconvenienced
    because it would be forced to expel more judicial resources than have
    already been consumed.
    10.    Defendant failed to demonstrate a any fair and just reason for
    withdraw of his guilty plea simply because he now is aware of
    potentially-favorable evidence.
    Therefore, Defendant’s Motion for Postconviction Relief is DENIED.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    ______________________
    Richard R. Cooch, R.J.
    cc:    Prothonotary
    Investigative Services
    10
    “The disease includes symptoms that ‘often disappear (go into remission), even without
    treatment, and then return (flare up).”’ Resp. of the State of Delaware to Def’s. Am. Mot. to
    Withdraw Guilty Plea at 6 (quoting Psoriasis Causes, Symptoms, Treatments, WebMD,
    November 30, 2015, http://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/psoriasis/psoriasis-
    topic-overview).
    11
    Def’s. Am. Mot. to Withdraw Guilty Plea ¶ 2.
    12
    State v. Barksdale, 
    2015 WL 5676895
    at* 6 (Del. Super. Sept. 14, 2015) (citations omitted).
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1405001074

Judges: Cooch

Filed Date: 12/1/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/3/2015