Opinion ID: 1417717
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Plea Agreement Discussion

Text: Appellant alleges error with regard to the trial court's comments to him concerning his rejection of a plea agreement tendered by the State. After the trial court learned on the eve of trial that Appellant had rejected the State's offer to allow him to plead guilty to second-degree murder, the court requested a conference with Appellant. During the discussion that ensued, the trial court proceeded to explain to Appellant the different sentencing possibilities for first and second degree murder convictions. [25] After explaining the various sentencing possibilities, the lower court instructed Appellant to reconfer with his counsel. After this conference with his attorney, Appellant again rejected the plea agreement. We find absolutely no merit in this assignment. As the State accurately observes, Appellant was represented by counsel during the plea negotiations and can make an ineffective assistance of counsel claim if he feels that he was not properly advised regarding the law as to the options presented to him. More importantly, however, as the State emphasizes is the fact that Appellant never once claims that he was misled by any of the Court's statements in making his decision to reject the plea agreement. We conclude that the lower court committed no reversible error with regard to the sentencing colloquy. Based on the foregoing, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, the decision of the Circuit Court of McDowell County is hereby affirmed. Affirmed.