State v. Oie
Case Date: 09/27/2005
Docket No: 20050031
|
State v. OieNo. 20050031 Per Curiam. [¶1] Paul Dean Oie appeals from a criminal judgment and commitment sentencing him to fifteen-years imprisonment, five years suspended, for two counts of Gross Sexual Imposition under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-03(2)(a). Oie entered Alford guilty pleas, North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), on each count but argues that a factual basis was not established for Count Two. The record reflects the district court made an open court inquiry into the factual basis and additionally supplemented such basis with information contained in the pre-sentence investigation report. A factual basis is to be established to the district court's satisfaction, Kaiser v. State, 417 N.W.2d 175, 178 (N.D. 1987), and may be provided by a pre-sentence investigation report. Froistad v. State, 2002 ND 52, ¶ 23, 641 N.W.2d 86. The standard of review for withdrawing a guilty plea after sentencing is "abuse of discretion." State v. Mortrud, 312 N.W.2d 354, 359 (N.D. 1981). [¶2] Concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion in accepting the guilty plea and a controlling decision by this Court is dispositive, we summarily affirm the criminal judgment and commitment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). [¶3]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. |