## Facts

- Joel Ira committed a series of violent sexual assaults and related attacks between ages fourteen and fifteen, primarily against his stepsister, who was nearly six years younger.
- The State charged multiple felonies, including ten counts of first-degree criminal sexual penetration, aggravated battery offenses, battery against a household member, and witness intimidation.
- Ira entered a plea agreement to multiple felony charges and was advised his maximum adult sentencing exposure was about 185 years.
- The State gave notice it would seek adult sanctions under the Children’s Code; after adjudication as a “youthful offender,” the district court had discretion to impose either a juvenile disposition (potentially up to age twenty-one) or an adult sentence.
- At sentencing, the court received extensive evidence about the prolonged and brutal conduct, Ira’s prior delinquent history and prior interventions, and expert mental-health testimony.
- Multiple experts opined Ira was not amenable to rehabilitation within the juvenile system and presented a high risk of reoffending.
- The district court imposed an adult prison sentence of 91.5 years.
- Ira moved to withdraw his plea; the district court denied the motion.

## Issues

1. Whether a 91.5-year adult sentence imposed on a youthful offender for crimes committed at ages fourteen to fifteen constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the federal and state constitutions.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Ira’s motion to withdraw his plea.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment and sentence.
- The court held the 91.5-year adult sentence was constitutional and not cruel and unusual punishment.
- The court held the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plea withdrawal.

## Legal Principles

- Under New Mexico’s youthful-offender provisions, once proper notice is given and the child is adjudged a youthful offender, a court may impose an adult sentence for enumerated serious offenses if statutory findings support adult sanctions, including non-amenability to rehabilitation within available juvenile facilities and related eligibility considerations.
- A lengthy term-of-years sentence for a juvenile is not unconstitutional per se; proportionality turns on offense gravity, the offender’s characteristics (including dangerousness and amenability to treatment), and legislative judgments about permissible penalties, and the sentence stands unless it is grossly disproportionate.
- A post-acceptance motion to withdraw a plea is reviewed for abuse of discretion; absent a showing the plea was involuntary, unknowing, or induced by material misinformation (including about maximum sentencing exposure), denial of withdrawal is generally affirmed.

## Conclusion

The court upheld adult sanctions for a youthful offender based on the brutality and repetition of the offenses and record-supported findings of non-amenability to juvenile rehabilitation, and it affirmed denial of plea withdrawal where the plea record did not show involuntariness or material misinformation about sentencing exposure.


State v. Ira, 43 P.3d 359 (N.M. Ct. App. 2002)