## Facts

- Police investigated a report that a television had been taken from Kelly King’s apartment.
- Officers saw a parked vehicle with a television in the front passenger seat; King’s son identified it as the stolen television.
- Officers observed Erin Setright (the vehicle’s owner) and Keith Allan Leyva enter the vehicle; Setright said Leyva already had the television when he asked for a ride.
- Officers detained Leyva; after learning of an outstanding warrant, they arrested him and performed a pat-down search.
- The search produced a knife, a brass pipe with marijuana residue, and a plastic bag with a minimal amount of methamphetamine residue.
- Leyva gave shifting explanations, including that he borrowed the television from King and borrowed the pants he was wearing from King; he denied owning the pipe, suggesting it was in the pants pocket when borrowed, while also claiming he put his knife in the pants pocket the night before.
- Leyva was charged with burglary (television) and third-offense methamphetamine possession (residue).
- The parties reached a plea agreement under which Leyva would plead guilty to the methamphetamine charge, the burglary charge would be dismissed, and the State would recommend a three-to-five-year sentence and not oppose probation if recommended.
- The district court initially accepted the guilty plea but later withdrew acceptance and set the case for trial.
- At trial, the court admitted evidence of the marijuana pipe; Leyva was convicted of both burglary and third-offense methamphetamine possession.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court lacked authority or abused its discretion by withdrawing its prior acceptance of Leyva’s guilty plea before judgment and sentencing.
2. Whether admitting evidence of the marijuana pipe (uncharged misconduct) was erroneous because it was improper character evidence or unfairly prejudicial.

## Decision

- The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed.
- The district court acted within its authority in withdrawing acceptance of the guilty plea before judgment and sentencing; the plea agreement did not entitle Leyva to compelled acceptance or dismissal of burglary.
- Admission of the marijuana pipe evidence was not an abuse of discretion because it served permissible non-propensity purposes, including completing the narrative of the arrest and assessing Leyva’s credibility through his inconsistent statements.
- The probative value of the pipe evidence was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.

## Legal Principles

- A plea agreement binds the parties but does not bind the court; before judgment is entered, the trial court may reconsider and withdraw acceptance of a guilty plea.
- A defendant generally is not entitled to specific performance of a plea agreement in the form of forced judicial acceptance of the plea or the negotiated charge dismissal.
- Evidence of uncharged misconduct may be admitted for non-character purposes, including providing contextual background of the charged events and demonstrating inconsistent statements or lack of credibility.
- Uncharged-misconduct evidence is subject to exclusion if unfair prejudice substantially outweighs probative value; appellate review focuses on abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the trial court’s pre-judgment withdrawal of plea acceptance and affirmed admission of the marijuana-pipe evidence as relevant to context and credibility rather than propensity, leaving intact Leyva’s burglary and third-offense methamphetamine possession convictions.


Leyva v. State, 165 P.3d 446 (Wyo. 2007)