Opinion ID: 1292204
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The trial judge is bound by the plea agreement he approved and accepted.

Text: ¶ 4 The statute at issue declares that any person who is convicted of the personal possession or use of a controlled substance as defined in § 36-2501 is eligible for probation. § 13-901.01(A). There are exceptions to eligibility for probation for a person convicted of a violent crime or for a person who has been convicted three times of personal possession or use of a controlled substance. § 13-901.01(C) and (G). It is a settled rule in Arizona that [a] judgment or sentence must conform to the offense for which an accused has been charged and convicted, or to which he has entered his plea of guilty. The court cannot render judgment or pronounce sentence for another or different offense. Haney v. Eyman, 97 Ariz. 289, 291, 399 P.2d 905, 906 (1965). In this case, Foster was not found guilty of possession of dangerous drugs for sale; thus he remains eligible for sentencing pursuant to § 13-901.01. ¶ 5 Our procedural rules also reflect the same principle. Upon a determination of guilt on any charge ... judgment pertaining ... to that charge shall be pronounced and entered together with the sentence. Ariz.R.Crim.P. 26.2(b) (emphasis added). Determination of guilt may be by verdict of guilty by a jury, a finding of guilt by a court following a non-jury trial, or the acceptance by the court of a plea of guilty or no contest. Ariz.R.Crim.P. 26.1(c) (emphasis added). Thus our court of appeals has concluded that once the State made the [plea] agreement with [defendant] and the [trial] court accepted and acted upon it, all parties were bound by it. Mejia v. Irwin, 195 Ariz. 270, 273, 987 P.2d 756, 759 (App. 1999). [H]aving accepted the plea agreement, the trial court may not use the underlying facts to sentence [defendant] for a crime for which he has never been convicted. Id. at 272, 987 P.2d at 758. We believe Mejia was correctly decided. ¶ 6 As the court said, If the State believed that [defendant] should not be entitled to mandatory probation, it should not have offered a plea agreement to mere possession of dangerous drugs. Similarly, if the trial court thought [defendant's] offense too serious to warrant mandatory probation, it could have rejected the plea agreement. Id. at 273, 987 P.2d at 759. The trial judge shall either accept or reject the tendered negotiated plea. Ariz.R.Crim.P. 17.4(d). Simply put, the trial judge may not accept and enter judgment on a guilty plea and then substitute his or her personal view of the facts to sentence the defendant for a crime for which he was not convicted.