Title: Yamada v. State

State: alabama

Issuer: Alabama Supreme Court

Document:

426 So. 2d 906 (1982)
Ex parte: State of Alabama.
(In re: Akiyoshi YAMADA
v.
STATE of Alabama).
81-626.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
August 6, 1982.
Rehearing Denied December 30, 1982.
*907 Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Elizabeth Ann Evans, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
John Baker, Fort Payne, for respondent.
TORBERT, Chief Justice.
Defendant Yamada pleaded guilty to a charge of forgery in the second degree. The trial court accepted the guilty plea, sentenced Yamada to two years' imprisonment, ordered him to serve four months of the term, and suspended the remainder. Yamada appealed and the Court of Criminal Appeals, 426 So. 2d 903 remanded because of a failure to follow the procedure set forth by the United States Supreme Court in North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S. Ct. 160, 27 L. Ed. 2d 162 (1970); that is, the trial court must find a factual basis for the plea. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that assertions by the prosecuting attorney of what he expects the evidence to show are insufficient to show a factual basis to support a guilty plea when the defendant asserts his innocence. We reverse.
During the trial, the trial judge explained the rights that would be relinquished by the defendant by pleading guilty. The defendant was then asked if he was pleading guilty because he was in fact guilty. The following occurred:
From this, the trial court found a basis to support the guilty plea, entered a judgment of conviction and sentenced the defendant as stated above.
The issue, therefore, becomes whether a factual basis for a guilty plea may be established by the District Attorney's assertions of what he expects the evidence to show. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that the State must present "legal evidence," but the State alleges that a factual basis may come from several sources. United States v. King, 604 F.2d 411 (5th Cir.1979). See also, Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S. Ct. 495, 30 L. Ed. 2d 427 (1971).
In North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S. Ct. 160, 27 L. Ed. 2d 162 (1970), the United States Supreme Court held that a factual basis was required for the trial court to accept a guilty plea. While evidence was taken from witnesses in Alford, the Court made no statement that it was required that such evidence be taken as "legal evidence." The Court stated:
400 U.S.  at 37, 91 S. Ct.  at 167. The Court of Criminal Appeals recently followed that holding in Young v. State, 408 So. 2d 199 (Ala.Cr.App.1981), in which it stated:
408 So. 2d  at 201.
Likewise, in Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S. Ct. 495, 30 L. Ed. 2d 427 (1971), it was observed:
A case more factually similar to this one is United States v. King, 604 F.2d 411 (5th Cir.1979). In that case, the defendant claimed that the court erred by not addressing him in determining whether a factual basis existed. The court, while holding that the defendant was addressed, specifically held that "As long as the factual basis is developed on the record, it may come from several sources" (emphasis supplied). The record, as shown in footnote 1 of the opinion in King, clearly indicates that the prosecutor showed what he expected the evidence to prove. The trial court accepted that showing and the sentence was pronounced.
It is apparent that the defendant in this case voluntarily and understandingly entered his plea of guilty. It thus becomes conclusive of his guilt. Knowles v. State, 280 Ala. 406, 194 So. 2d 562, cert. denied, 386 U.S. 1011, 87 S. Ct. 1358, 18 L. Ed. 2d 442 (1967); Camp v. State, 359 So. 2d 1187 (Ala. Cr.App.1978). Such a plea "serves as a stipulation that no proof by the prosecution need be advanced, except as expressly provided by statute, and it supplies both evidence and verdict, thereby ending the controversy." Albright v. State, 50 Ala.App. 480, 484, 280 So. 2d 186, cert. denied, 291 Ala. 771, 280 So. 2d 191 (1973). A guilty plea is an admission of all the elements of the offense charged. Barnes v. State, 354 So. 2d 343 (Ala.Cr.App.1978).
In this case it is clear that Yamada voluntarily and understandingly entered his plea of guilty, finding it in his best interests to do so, and the mere fact that he denied any criminal intent is insufficient to override such a guilty plea. We likewise hold that a factual basis for accepting a guilty plea may be established by several sources, including a prosecuting attorney's assertions of what he expects the evidence to show. For these reasons, the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed and the cause remanded.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
FAULKNER, ALMON, SHORES, EMBRY, BEATTY and ADAMS, JJ., concur.