Background
Ruben Alex Pacheco entered a global plea agreement resolving three cases. He pleaded to second- and third-offense OWI charges and repeated sexual assault of a child. In exchange, the State agreed to sentencing recommendations, dismissed and read in remaining charges, and resolved all three matters together.
After sentencing, Pacheco sought to withdraw all three pleas. The State conceded that the two OWI convictions were defective because the OWI charges had been misclassified, but argued that he could withdraw only those pleas. The circuit court allowed withdrawal of the OWI pleas, denied withdrawal of the unchallenged child-sexual-assault plea, and reinstated the OWI cases for prosecution.
The Court’s Holding
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that a defect in some pleas resolved through a global plea agreement does not create an inflexible rule requiring vacatur of every conviction covered by that agreement.
The circuit court properly exercised its discretion by considering the totality of the circumstances. The OWI errors did not undermine the validity of Pacheco’s plea to repeated sexual assault of a child; Pacheco retained benefits from that agreement, including dismissed-and-read-in charges; and the State agreed not to reissue the reckless-endangerment charge associated with the third OWI case. The court could also weigh the State’s and victim’s interests, the passage of time, and the substantial difference in seriousness between the OWI offenses and the child-sexual-assault offense.
Key Takeaways
- Partial withdrawal of pleas under a global agreement may be an appropriate remedy.
- Vacating an entire plea agreement is ordinarily available, but is not mandatory as a matter of law.
- A court may weigh the defendant’s retained benefits, the validity of unaffected pleas, and the interests of the State and victims.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that Wisconsin courts retain discretion to tailor postconviction plea-withdrawal remedies. A defendant cannot obtain withdrawal of an otherwise valid plea merely because separate pleas in a global resolution were defective, absent a showing that the defects created a manifest injustice as to the valid conviction.