Justia Wyoming Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant pled guilty to second degree murder and was sentenced to serve seventy-five years to life in prison. On appeal, Appellant contended that the district court considered improper evidence in determining his sentence. Applying plain error review, the Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not err by considering during sentencing statements from individuals who did not meet the statutory definition of victim; and (2) the trial court did not err in allowing the State to present evidence at sentencing that Appellant claimed was in violation of Wyo. R. Crim. P. 32. View "Town v. State" on Justia Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to one count of second degree sexual abuse of a minor. The district court sentenced Defendant to five to ten years of incarceration but suspended the sentence and ordered him to serve six years on supervised probation. After Defendant was released on probation, the State petitioned to revoke Defendant’s probation, alleging several violations of the conditions of his probation. After a hearing, the district court revoked Defendant’s probation. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the district court (1) did not commit reversible error by failing to make an express finding that Defendant’s probation condition violations were willful; and (2) did not abuse its discretion by revoking Defendant’s probation. View "Miller v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of three counts of delivery of cocaine. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding (1) the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; (2) Defendant was not denied his right to confrontation when law enforcement officers testified about results of tests conducted by others; (3) the prosecutor did not commit misconduct; but (4) Defendant’s trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to improper testimony and argument, by failing to demand notice of Wyo. R. Crim. P. 404(b) evidence and enter an objection to the testimony, and by failing to request that audio tapes of controlled buys be played in their entirety, and Defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance. View "Fennell v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of second-degree murder. On appeal, Appellant argued that the jury was not properly instructed on the element of malice under the Court’s decision in Wilkerson v. State, which was issued after Appellant’s conviction. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that because Appellant failed to show a reasonable probability that he would have received a more favorable verdict had the jury been instructed in accordance with Wilkerson, Appellant did not show that the instructional error resulted in material prejudice to him, and therefore, there was no plain error in the jury instructions. View "Miller v. State" on Justia Law

Defendant entered a conditional plea to possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. Defendant was sentenced to two consecutive sentences of seven to ten years and fourteen to eighteen years. The Supreme Court affirmed. After unsuccessfully seeking a sentence reduction, postconviction relief, and habeas relief, Defendant filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence, arguing that his sentences violated double jeopardy. The district court denied the motion on the basis of res judicata. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Defendant’s claims were barred by res judicata. View "Tucker v. State" on Justia Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to larceny by bailee and two counts of false statement to obtain title. Defendant appealed, arguing (1) the district court erred in denying his motion to amend judgment and sentence in the larceny charge; (2) the district court erred in denying his motions to amend the captions in both criminal matters; and (3) with regard to his larceny by bailee charge, he was sentenced under a criminal statute that was repealed during the pendency of his proceedings. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Defendant failed to timely file a direct appeal to the Court. View "Manzanares v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of felony possession of marijuana. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction for felony possession, holding (1) the evidence was insufficient to support Appellant’s conviction because, assuming a jury could reasonably find that Defendant could have controlled the marijuana, the State failed to show that Defendant had the intent and power to exercise dominion and control over the drugs; but (2) the evidence was sufficient to support the lesser included offense of misdemeanor possession of marijuana. Remanded for resentencing on that offense. View "Regan v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of child abuse and third-degree sexual assault of a minor under Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-2-503(b)(i) and Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-2-316(a)(iv). The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Appellant was not denied his right to a speedy trial under Wyo. R. Crim. P. 48 and under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution; (2) the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain Appellant’s conviction of sexual abuse of a minor in the third degree; and (3) Appellant was not deprived of the effective assistance of trial counsel. View "Rhodes v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant pled guilty to one count of burglary and was placed on probation. As part of his probation, Appellant was required to complete a community corrections program and a residential treatment program. Appellant was confined in such a facility for a total of 187 days. After Appellant’s probation was revoked, the district court imposed the underlying sentence, but Appellant was not credited for the time he spent in the community corrections facility. Appellant later field a motion to correct illegal sentence seeking credit for the 187 days he spent in the community corrections facility. The district court ruled that Appellant was not entitled to credit for time spent in the community corrections facility. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that Appellant was entitled to 187 days of credit for time served in the community corrections facility. View "Nunes v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of first-degree sexual assault and two counts of third-degree sexual abuse of a minor. Defendant was sentenced as a habitual criminal to life imprisonment on the first-degree sexual assault conviction and two thirteen- and fifteen-years on the remaining two charges, to be served concurrently to each other and to the life sentence. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Defendant was serving in a position of authority over the victim; (2) Defendant was correctly charged; (3) the district court did not violate any rule of law by not merging Defendant’s convictions and sentences; and (4) Defendant was properly sentenced as a habitual criminal. View "Rogers v. State" on Justia Law