Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

372 So. 2d 1221

Docket No. 63896.

State v. Deakle

STATE of Louisiana v. Terrill L. DEAKLE.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided June 25, 1979.

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1979-06-25

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“"Article 559 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that `[t]he court may permit a plea of guilty to be withdrawn at any time before sentence.' We have interpreted that article as granting broad discretion to the trial judge. State v. Robinson, 311 So.2d 893 (La. 1975); State v. Johnson, 260 La. 902 , 247 So.2d 654 (1972).... "No reason for the trial judge's permitting withdrawal other than the foregoing is suggested in the record. Under the circumstances the trial judge did not abuse the broad discretion afforded him by Article 559. Defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea simply because the sentence to be imposed is heavier than anticipated. State v. Robinson, supra . It is not unreasonable for the trial judge to refuse to allow defendant the luxury of gambling on what sentence he will be given, then withdrawing his plea if and when he can discover, without imposition, that the sentence is not to his liking. See State v. Johnson, supra ." 372 So.2d at p. 1222 .”

quoted by 4 later decisions, including State v. Lockwood, State v. Trahan

““The court may permit a plea of guilty to be withdrawn at any time before sentence.””

quoted by 2 later decisions, including 586 So. 2d 701 - State v. Mitchell, 457 So. 2d 1264 - State v. Banks

Relies on State v. Johnson · 311 So. 2d 893 - State v. Robinson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1979-06-25

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably 572 So. 2d 1166 - State v. Greer (1990), 903 So. 2d 1265 - State v. Roe (2005)

25 state decisions

13019791980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1222 A. J. Boudreaux, Metairie, for defendant-appellant.

¶2William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., John M. Mamoulides, Dist. Atty., William W. Hall, Abbott J. Reeves, Asst. Dist. Attys., for plaintiff-appellee.

¶3CALOGERO, Justice.

¶4Seven weeks after pleading guilty to armed robbery and just prior to imposition of sentence defendant Terrill Deakle moved to withdraw his guilty plea. The trial judge denied his motion, then sentenced defendant to thirty-five years at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. Defendant's appeal from the conviction and sentence raises only one issue, whether the trial judge's refusal to allow defendant to withdraw his guilty plea constitutes reversible error.

¶5Article 559 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that "[t]he court may permit a plea of guilty to be withdrawn at any time before sentence." We have interpreted that article as granting broad discretion to the trial judge. State v. Robinson,311 So.2d 893 (La.1975); State v. Johnson,260 La. 902, 257 So.2d 654 (1972).

¶6In the instant case defendant was fully apprised before he pled guilty of the minimum and maximum sentences possible, namely five years and ninety-nine years respectively, and that the court had made no promise other than to conduct a pre-sentence investigation. Defendant's attorney did not tell defendant he would get less than thirty-five years, but rather simply that based on counsel's experience defendant would probably be facing a sentence between ten and twenty-five years. Presumably the motion to withdraw the guilty plea was prompted by defendant's learning just before sentencing that the trial judge intended to give a thirty-five year sentence.

¶7No reason for the trial judge's permitting withdrawal other than the foregoing is suggested in the record. Under the circumstances the trial judge did not abuse the broad discretion afforded him by Article 559. Defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea simply because the sentence to be imposed is heavier than anticipated. State v. Robinson, supra. It is not unreasonable for the trial judge to refuse to allow defendant the luxury of gambling on what sentence he will be given, then withdrawing his plea if and when he can discover, before imposition, that the sentence is not to his liking. See, State v. Johnson, supra.

¶8

Decree

¶9For the foregoing reasons defendant's conviction and sentence are affirmed.

¶10AFFIRMED.

/372/so2d/1221 · .json · Public domain