It is very difficult to appeal a sentence after pleading guilty to a crime. The Rhode Island Supreme Court has said that defendants waive their right to appeal a conviction when they plead guilty.
While there are certain circumstances under which you can appeal, these are extremely limited. There are far more opportunities to appeal a conviction after trial. A criminal defendant should always make sure that they want to plead guilty before doing so. That is because it is not guaranteed that they can successfully challenge the conviction on appeal.
Appeal vs. Post-Conviction Relief
Even though there are limited options to appeal a sentence after pleading guilty, some defendants can ask for post-conviction relief.
Post-conviction relief is like an appeal. The difference is that it is filed in district court rather than the circuit court. The trial judge hears the petition instead of an appellate judge, typically the same judge who originally accepted the guilty plea.
Petitions for post-conviction relief tend to allege that there was an error outside of the court record that makes the plea invalid. The most common claim is that the defendant did not knowingly, voluntarily, or intelligently plead guilty.
Usually, the defendant argues that they didn’t understand the charges or the consequences of pleading guilty. They didn’t understand because their lawyer didn’t explain it properly.
If a petition for post-conviction relief is granted, the case can be reopened. Various remedies are available, including vacating the sentence or changing the plea. If the petition for post-conviction relief is denied, the defendant can file an appeal.
While post-conviction relief is a better option than an appeal for people who have pleaded guilty, winning is not guaranteed. If you want to petition for post-conviction relief, you should contact a Providence criminal defense attorney immediately.
Requirements Of A Guilty Plea
Part of the reason that it is difficult to appeal from a guilty plea is that there are strict requirements for a guilty plea.
In order for the court to accept a plea deal, the judge must confirm that the defendant is entering into the guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily. If the defendant did not voluntarily plead guilty, the plea is unconstitutional.
A voluntary plea generally means that the defendant:
- Is competent
- Understood the charges against them
- Understood the rights waived by pleading guilty, such as the right to a jury and to question witnesses
- Was fully advised by their lawyer before the plea or knowingly waived their right to counsel before pleading guilty
- Did not enter the plea under duress or by threats or force
Judges usually conduct a plea colloquy to make sure that the defendant is pleading guilty voluntarily. The colloquy is a conversation between a judge and a defendant and covers all the requirements of a plea. If the judge is satisfied that the plea is voluntary, they will accept the plea.
Petitions for post-conviction relief usually go to the same judge to conduct the plea. So, it is rare that they will find that the plea was involuntary. However, it is not unheard of, especially if new facts come to light.
Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel
A critical part of the voluntariness rule of any plea is that the defendant was fully advised by their lawyer beforehand. Before pleading guilty, a good criminal defense attorney will talk with their client about:
- The elements of the charges
- Viable defenses
- The potential penalties and likelihood of conviction
- Strengths and weaknesses of their case
- The criminal court process
- Their constitutional legal rights and all rights waived by the plea
- The known evidence against them
- The collateral consequences of a conviction
- Potential immigration consequences of pleading guilty
If a lawyer fails to fully advise their client before pleading guilty, the client may argue ineffective assistance of counsel. They make this argument at a post-conviction relief hearing. However, an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is difficult to win.
Elements of Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Claim
To win an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, you must argue more than your attorney was bad. The Rhode Island Supreme Court applies a two-part test.
In the first part, the defendant must show that the lawyer’s work performance was extremely lacking. In fact, it was so lacking that they weren’t acting as counsel guaranteed under the 6th Amendment.
This means that the lawyer made such great errors that they were not competent. It is more than just a lawyer giving bad advice. The first part of the test is hard to prove because there is a presumption that lawyers are acting effectively.
In the second part of the test, the defendant must show that they were prejudiced by the ineffective assistance of counsel. In a situation where a defendant has pleaded guilty, they must show that:
- But for the lawyer’s error, the defendant would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial AND
- The outcome of the trial would have been different
This second part of the claim is very burdensome. A defendant must show that not only would they not have pleaded guilty and insisted on going to trial, but that they would have won the trial. This is extremely difficult to prove.
It is rare to win an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, especially after pleading guilty. However, it is not impossible. It is more common to win ineffective assistance of counsel claims in cases where there are immigration consequences to a plea. That’s because attorneys must advise their clients of immigration consequences before the plea.
If you have pleaded guilty to a crime in Rhode Island, you shouldn’t feel hopeless. You could still have legal options for post-conviction relief or on appeal. Contact Manosh Payette Criminal Defense Attorneys to schedule a free consultation with a Providence criminal defense lawyer. Call us today at (401) 854-7794.
