Justia Wyoming Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant pleaded guilty to attempted second-degree murder. The district court accepted Appellant’s guilty plea and sentenced him to not less than twenty-five and no more than fifty years incarceration. After unsuccessfully moving to withdraw his guilty plea and filing a petition for post-conviction relief, Appellant filed a Wyo. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion for sentence reduction, requesting that his sentence be reduced to fifteen to twenty-five years. The district court denied the motion. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Appellant failed to overcome his burden of proving that the district court abused its discretion in denying his Rule 35(b) motion. View "Chapman v. State" on Justia Law

Following Defendant’s involvement in an automobile accident, law enforcement officers searched Defendant’s vehicle and found marijuana. Defendant was subsequently charged with felony possession of marijuana. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence obtained in the search of his vehicle as well as his statements to law enforcement, arguing that the investigating officer impermissibly extended the scope of his detention. The district court denied the motion to suppress. Thereafter, Defendant pleaded guilty to the charge, reserving the right to appeal the court’s order denying his motion to suppress. On appeal, instead of challenging the search of his vehicle, Defendant argued that the State failed to present sufficient evidence at the suppression hearing concerning the certification of the drug dog used by the investigating officer to conduct a free-air sniff outside Defendant’s vehicle. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that in entering his conditional plea, Defendant did not properly reserve any questions concerning the reliability of the drug dog, and therefore, that issue may not be addressed here. View "Ward v. State" on Justia Law

At approximately 10:18 p.m., police officers searched Defendant’s home pursuant to a search warrant and found marijuana and drug paraphernalia. Defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with delivery of and possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance. Defendant filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized in the search, arguing that the search was unlawful and in violation of his constitutional rights because the search warrant was served after 10 p.m. contrary to the plain language of the warrant. The district court granted the motion to suppress based upon a procedural violation of Wyo. R. Crim. P. 41(c). The Supreme Court reversed, holding that although the officers violated Rule 41(c), the violation did not warrant suppression of the evidence seized in the search under the circumstances of this case. View "State v. Deen" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of one count of attempted second-degree sexual abuse of a minor. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not err by not declaring a mistrial after one potential juror made an improper remark and others who were ultimately excused became emotional during voir dire; (2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by supplementing the jury instructions consistent with the Information to clarify the conduct charged; and (3) the delay between Appellant’s conviction and sentencing did not violate his constitutional right to speedy sentencing. View "Brown v. State" on Justia Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to a third or subsequent offense of possession of a controlled substance, a felony, and misdemeanor driving while under the influence. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the district court did not err by ordering Defendant to receive and pay for a substance abuse assessment and then by relying on the assessment at sentencing to determine that defendant was a “qualified offender” and, in turn, recommending that Defendant successfully complete substance abuse treatment while in prison through the Intensive Treatment Unit or a comparable program, as the district court’s decision was in accordance with the law. View "Marshall v. State" on Justia Law

Petitioner was arrested for driving while under the influence of alcohol. Petitioner initially refused to take a breath test until the arresting highway patrol trooper said that a search warrant would be obtained and that a blood sample could be forcibly obtained if Petitioner did not cooperate. Petitioner then submitted to the breath test, which he failed. The trooper then issued Petitioner a notice of license suspension. After a contested case hearing, the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) upheld the proposed suspension. The district court reversed, concluding that Petitioner was tricked into submitting to the breath test by the trooper’s statements. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the OAH correctly found that Petitioner was properly advised as required by statute and not tricked or misled. View "State ex rel. Wyo. Dep’t of Transp. v. Icenhower" on Justia Law

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pleaded no contest to second degree sexual abuse. Defendant was previously convicted of a similar offense and specifically acknowledged in the plea agreement that the sentence for a second conviction of second degree sexual abuse of a minor was life in prison without the possibility of parole. The district court sentenced Defendant to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Defendant’s sentence of life without the possibility of parole did not violate the Eighth Amendment because it was not grossly disproportionate to the crime; and (2) the sentence did not violate Wyo. Const. art. I, 14. View "Norgaard v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of felony stalking for stalking his estranged wife in violation of a protection order. The district court sentenced Defendant to a term of incarceration of nine to ten years. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding (1) the State presented sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant acted with the requisite intent to harass his victim; and (2) the district court did not commit reversible error when it instructed the jury concerning the elements of the crime of stalking. View "Dean v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant was charged with four drug-related felonies. Appellant filed a motion and an amended motion to suppress the evidence police officers obtained against him in a search of Appellant’s apartment. The district court denied the motion, and Appellant entered a conditional guilty plea to felony possession of marijuana. Appellant appealed, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the district court (1) erred in concluding that the initial intrusion into Appellant’s apartment was lawful and justified by the emergency assistance exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement; and (2) correctly found that Appellant’s consent to the police’s later entry into and search of his apartment was voluntarily given. Remanded for a ruling on whether Appellant’s consent was tainted by the initial unlawful search of his apartment. View "Campbell v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant was convicted of aggravated burglary and attempted kidnapping. The district court sentenced Appellant to twelve to fifteen years imprisonment on each conviction, the two sentences to run concurrently. The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences on appeal. Appellant subsequently filed a motion to reduce his sentence. The district court denied the motion. The Supreme Court affirmed without addressing the merits of Appellant’s claims, as Appellant’s brief in many respects failed to comply with the requirements of Wyo. R. App. P. 7.01 and Appellant's arguments were either improperly raised on appeal or not cogent. View "Silva v. State" on Justia Law