The Case of Appeal Waivers is not Complicated Anymore

Last year I discussed the complicated issue of how appeal waivers were reviewed in Indiana’s appellate courts. At the time, the Indiana Supreme Court had just heard arguments in Matthew H. Thomas Davis v. State.

Yesterday, the Court handed down its decision, which can be found here. The Court held that because the defendant entered into a plea agreement with the State that included a clear appeal waiver, and the trial court sentenced the defendant within the terms of the agreement, the appeal waiver applied. Thus, the defendant’s appeal was dismissed.

It does not matter whether the trial court misadvised the defendant about the appeal waiver. Rather, if a misadvisement occurred and the defendant believed it induced him to plead, his only recourse was to seek relief through a petition for post-conviction relief.

The Supreme Court summarized its holding as follows: “In sum, Davis’s written plea agreement with the State, which both he and his attorney signed, unambiguously waived his right to appeal his sentence. If Davis’s guilty plea was nevertheless not knowing and voluntary because the trial judge’s misstatements misled him about which rights he was waiving, then Davis may demonstrate that through post-conviction proceedings, and his conviction can be set aside. That would restore his right to appeal any sentence and all other rights he waived through his plea agreement and guilty plea. But we cannot decide in the first instance on a direct appeal whether Davis is able to make that showing.”