Court Opinion

ID: 9803678
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 15:52:47.966472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:01:21.343036
License: Public Domain

CHIEF JUSTICE McGRATH,
dissenting.
¶21 I dissent. At the sentencing hearing on September 4,2012, Zunick stated he agreed with the ten-year suspended sentence imposed by the District Court. He stated he understood he could be sentenced to ten years in prison for violating the terms of that suspended sentence. He stated he had reviewed the recommended conditions listed in the presentencing investigation report, and had no questions about them. On March 26, 2013, Zunick violated the conditions of his suspended sentence by driving without the authorization of his probation officer, although a petition for revocation was not filed at that time. On May *29924, 2013, Zunick moved to modify the condition prohibiting him from driving without authorization. The motion was denied June 18,2013. Zunick did not move to withdraw his plea until September 17, 2013, after he had already violated a condition of his sentence and failed in his attempt to have that condition modified.
¶22 Zunick acquiesced in the sentencing proceedings and took advantage of the benefits of a completely suspended sentence for a full year before moving to withdraw his plea. Zunick was not in any way coerced or misled with respect to the consequences of his plea. He simply found the conditions advantageous, until he didn’t. I would affirm the order of the District Comí; denying Zunick’s motion to withdraw plea.