Opinion ID: 1191658
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: inadequate information upon which the guilty plea was accepted

Text: Appellant argues extensively by brief, and particularly in oral argument, that the text of the transcript does not justify the acceptance of the plea on some of the included offenses. We agree, without recognizing any particular resulting difference. In the context of the oft-repeated appellate rule that hard cases make bad law, we would not want to utilize this circumstance to disadvantage another individual in a different factual situation by a casual comment that it doesn't make any difference. Specifically addressing our attention to the sixth and seventh offenses, we do not find sufficient facts demonstrated from the record which could justify entry of a sentence by the court, and the convictions on those counts are reversed. Notwithstanding the acceptance of a plea of guilty, the court should not enter a judgment upon such plea without making such inquiry as shall satisfy it that there is a factual basis for the plea. Rule 15(f), W.R.Cr.P. Hoggatt v. State, Wyo., 606 P.2d 718 (1980); Cardenas v. Meacham, Wyo., 545 P.2d 632 (1976); State v. Coleman, Ariz. App., 733 P.2d 1166 (1987). Upon remand, an order should be entered reversing the conviction as to the sixth and seventh offenses, since a retrial on those charges would not now be possible considering the present misdemeanor status of offenses under the joyriding statutes. Appellant has served as much time as a new sentence could afford. I would reverse the convictions as to Counts VI and VII; the convictions as to Counts I through V are affirmed; and the sentence entered following revocation of probation is affirmed.