Abuse of Discretion – Plea Withdrawal

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District II

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Kevin L. Nash

Case No.: 2018AP731-CR

Officials: Lundsten, P.J., Blanchard, and Fitzpatrick, JJ.

Focus: Abuse of Discretion – Plea Withdrawal

Kevin Nash appeals a judgment convicting him of second degree sexual assault of a child and an order denying his post-sentencing motion to withdraw his entry of an Alford plea on the ground of manifest injustice. See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37-38 (1970) (addressing the constitutionality of a plea of no contest, resulting in a conviction, when the accused affirmatively denies guilt). The manifest injustice occurred, Nash contends, because the circuit court “erred in finding a sufficient factual basis to accept” his Alford plea. We conclude that the plea-taking court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in denying Nash’s post-sentencing plea withdrawal motion. This is because the court accepted the plea premised on a factual basis that, if proven at trial, would constitute “strong proof of guilt.” Accordingly we affirm.

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.