DocketNumber: No. 52,023–KA
Judges: McCallum, Stephens, Stone
Filed Date: 5/23/2018
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/18/2024
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Artari P. Woods pled guilty to one count of distribution of marijuana, in violation of La. R.S. 40:966(A)(1). As per the agreement, the trial court sentenced Woods to 15 years at hard labor, 7 years of which were suspended and 5 years of probation. Woods now appeals his conviction and sentence. Woods' appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with a brief pursuant to Anders v. California ,
FACTS
On May 24, 2016, Artari P. Woods sold marijuana and methamphetamine to a confidential informant in Desoto Parish. On January 27, 2017, Woods was charged by bill of information with three counts of distribution of marijuana, in violation of La. R.S. 40:966(A)(1), and two counts of distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of La. R.S. 40:967(A)(1). On April 12, 2017, Woods pled guilty to one count of distribution of Schedule I, controlled dangerous substance. The state agreed to a sentence of 15 years at hard labor, with 7 years suspended and 5 years of probation. In exchange for the guilty plea, the state dismissed the remaining charges and agreed to forgo habitual offender proceedings against Woods.
Prior to accepting the guilty plea, Woods was informed of and waived his rights in accordance with Boykin v. Alabama ,
Woods filed a "Notice of Intent to seek direct appeal and request that this court set defendant's filing deadline with the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeal," which the trial court granted on August 23, 2017. The Louisiana Appellate Project was appointed to represent Woods for his out-of-time appeal.
On November 28, 2017, Woods' appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders brief, alleging he could find no nonfrivolous issues to raise on appeal. See, Anders,
DISCUSSION
Under both state and federal jurisprudence, an unqualified plea of guilty waives all nonjurisdictional defects occurring prior thereto and constitutes an intelligent waiver of appellate review of the merits of the prosecution's case against a defendant. State v. Spain ,
After a thorough review of the record, we agree with appellate counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal. Woods was properly charged by a bill of information which was signed by an assistant district attorney. He was present in court and represented by counsel at all pertinent stages of the proceedings. The trial court advised Woods of the nature of the charges against him, the consequences of guilty pleas, and the sentencing ranges he would have been exposed to had he not entered into the plea agreement, including the terms of probation that would be imposed. The record shows that prior to entering his guilty plea, Woods was properly advised of his Boykin rights, understood the plea agreement, and was not forced, coerced, or threatened into entering his guilty pleas. The trial court sentenced Woods in accordance with the plea agreement, and thus, Woods is precluded from seeking review of that sentence. La. C. Cr. P. art. 881.2(A)(2) ; State v. Halley , 46,296 (La. App. 2 Cir. 8/10/11),
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the motion to withdraw is granted, and Woods' conviction and sentence are affirmed.
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED.