Scenario: Defendant is indicted for PCS with intent to manufacture. When he pleads guilty as charged in the indictment (and receives deferred probation) prosecutor inadvertently lists offense in all plea papers as PCS with intent to deliver. Court copies plea papers, so judgment states that defendant plead guilty to PCS with intent to deliver.
Offense occurred prior to September 1, 2001, so intent to manufacture and intent to deliver were the same offense under HSC � 481.112. Practically speaking, I see no harm. But the Court doesn't like it, and the court wrote the State and the defense a letter stating so. What's the solution? Will judgment nunc pro tunc work? Or, while Court still has plenary power, should we agree to a new trial and start the plea from scratch?
So the plea in the transcript is all OK -- the guy plead in court to the charge in the indictment, and the stipulations support that indictment -- it is just the documents that list the incorrect charge?
See Ex parte Dopps, 723 S.W.2d 669. My concern would be if he did not plea to the correct charge, or that he stipulated to having committed a different offense than the one charged.
|Powered by Social Strata|