Colucci (Edward) v. State

by his counsel." See Ford v. Warden, 111 Nev. 872, 884, 901 P.2d 123, 130 (1995) (holding that an appellant "cannot change [his] theory underlying an assignment of error on appeal"). We conclude that Colucci is not entitled to relief "District courts may grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea prior to sentencing for any substantial, fair, and just reason." Crawford v. State, 117 Nev. 718, 721, 30 P.3d 1123, 1125 (2001); see NRS 176.165. Here, the district court conducted an evidentiary hearing and heard testimony from Colucci and his former counsel, John Momot. Momot testified that he met 57 times with Colucci prior to the entry of his plea and provided documentation indicating that he reviewed multiple plea offers by the State with him. The district court specifically found "that [what] we saw today really emphasize[s] the care that was taken by Mr. Momot's office to go over what the charges were and what he would be pleading to." The district court determined that "after listening to all the evidence" and reviewing the plea agreement memorandum and oral plea canvass, "it does appear to me that this plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered." See Molina v. State, 120 Nev. 185, 191, 87 P.3d 533, 537-38 (2004) ("A district court must examine the totality of the circumstances to determine whether a defendant entered his plea voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently."). Our review of the record reveals that Colucci failed to either provide a substantial, fair, and just reason which required the withdrawal of his plea, see Crawford, 117 Nev. at 721, 30 P.3d at 1125, or demonstrate that counsel's performance was deficient, see Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984); see also Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. , 132 S. Ct. 1399, 1405-06 (2012); Latter v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 132 S. Ct. 1376, 1384 (2012). SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A 'e Therefore, because Colucci failed to satisfy his burden and prove that his plea was invalid, see Molina, 120 Nev. at 190, 87 P.3d at 537, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying his motion, Johnson v. State, 123 Nev. 139, 144, 159 P.3d 1096, 1098 (2007). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. / Hardesty cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A Algetrn