AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant entered a plea agreement, pleading guilty to two counts of third-degree felony robbery. As part of the agreement, a maximum penalty was set, but the State agreed to a sentencing cap of three years at initial sentencing, contingent upon the Defendant not violating any conditions of release or other court orders. The Defendant was ordered to report to a drug court program as a preprosecution diversion but failed to complete it, leading to the resumption of the sentencing hearing and the imposition of a six-year sentence followed by two years of parole (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the plea agreement was ambiguous regarding the sentencing cap, believed he could not be sentenced to more than three years of imprisonment, and sought specific performance of the agreement as he understood it (para 4).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the plea agreement was ambiguous regarding the sentencing cap and if the Defendant is entitled to specific performance of the agreement as he understood it (para 4).

Disposition

• The Court affirmed the judgment and sentence of the district court, imposing a six-year sentence followed by two years of parole (para 8).

Reasons

• Per Jacqueline R. Medina, J. (J. Miles Hanisee, C.J., and Kristina Bogardus, J., concurring): The Court found no ambiguity in the plea agreement regarding the conditions that would allow the State to withdraw its agreement to the three-year sentencing limitation. The Defendant's failure to complete the drug court program, a condition of his release, constituted a violation that permitted the State to void the previously negotiated sentencing agreement. Consequently, the district court was allowed to sentence the Defendant without the previously negotiated limitation, leading to the affirmation of the six-year sentence followed by two years of parole (paras 4-8).