[30ASR2d20]
v.
FOU NOFOAGATOTOA, Defendant
High Court of
Trial Division
CR No. 57-95
[1] A plea
agreement that does not state a disposition allowable under applicable law is
invalid. The Territory’s criminal law
has been codified, so the fact that a disposition is not disallowed does not
make it available to the sentencing court.
A.S.C.A. §§ 46.3102-3104.
[2] There is
only one exception to the general requirement that the court must deal with
criminal offenders as proscribed in Chapter 19 of the Criminal Justice Act
(A.S.C.A. § 46.1901 et seq.). This
exception provides for the option of deferred proceedings, upon a plea of guilt
or finding of guilt, in the context of a possession of a controlled substance
charge, under Title 13. A.S.C.A. §
13.1024. There is no parallel provision
for deferred proceedings in the context of assault related prosecutions.
Before KRUSE, Chief Justice, TAUANU`U, Chief
Associate Judge, and LOGOAI, Associate Judge.
Counsel: For
Plaintiff, Frederick J. O'Brien,
Assistant Attorney General
For Defendant, Barry I. Rose
Order Rejecting Plea Agreement:
This matter was set for jury trial on
Plaintiff will recommend
that, as to Count 1, the Court, without entering a judgment of guilt, defer
proceedings and place Defendant on probation upon such terms and conditions as
the Court deems appropriate. Defendant
understands that the Court is not bound to follow this recommendation but may,
in its discretion, sentence [30ASR2d21] Defendant up to the maximum provided by
law.
Upon inquiry by the Court as to the viability of
this proposal, the parties simply submitted that such a disposition is not
prohibited by statute or rule.
[1] We decline
to consider this proposal as an allowable disposition under applicable
law. First, the territory's criminal law
is codified. See A.S.C.A. §§
46.3102-3104. Therefore, the parties'
submission, to the effect that if it is not disallowed it is allowed, is
invalid.[1]
[2] Count 1 of the information
charges the defendant with the offense of Assault in the 3rd degree, in
violation of A.S.C.A. § 46.3522. This
enactment provides that a person commits the crime of assault in the 3rd degree
if he or she undertakes certain proscribed conduct. The authorized range of disposition for
criminal conduct, including assault in the 3rd degree, is explicitly set out in
A.S.C.A. § 46.1901. This enactment,
which is couched in mandatory language, requires that the Court shall
deal with criminal offenders in accordance with Chapter 19 of the Criminal
Justice Act, "except for offenses defined outside [the Criminal
Justice Act] and not in accordance with the classifications of this chapter
[19] and not repealed, the term of imprisonment or fine that maybe imposed is
that provided in the statute defining offense." The only exception to this general
requirement is that contained in A.S.C.A. § 13.1024, which provides for the
option of deferred proceedings, upon a plea of guilt or finding of guilt, in the
context of a possession of a controlled substance charge, under Title 13.[2] There is no parallel provision for deferred
proceedings in the context of assault related prosecutions.
We conclude, and accordingly hold, that the parties'
proposal is not an authorized disposition available to the sentencing court,
and, therefore, reject the plea agreement as presented.
This matter is continued to
It is so ordered.
[1]
A.S.C.A. § 46.3104 reads: "No
conduct constitutes an offense or an infraction unless made so by this title,
other applicable statutes, or the Uniform Village Regulations."
[2]
Cf. Criminal Procedure Act 1972 (