Brock v. State
In Brock v. State, 981 P.2d 465 (Wyo. 1999), the defendant entered a guilty plea to aggravated assault, three misdemeanor counts of telephone harassment, and one misdemeanor count of terroristic threats. 981 P.2d at 467-68.
After replacing counsel, Brock moved to withdraw his guilty pleas prior to sentencing. Brock requested a hearing on the motion but the court denied the motion without a hearing concluding that the pleas were in compliance with W.R.Cr.P. 11, and that the motion did not articulate persuasive or cogent reasons for withdrawal. Id. at 468.
On appeal, the Court reversed, finding that the district court had abused its discretion by denying the motion without granting a hearing. Id.
The Court analogized the situation to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under W.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) where all facts alleged are accepted as being true and viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, and held that a hearing must be conducted on a motion to withdraw a guilty plea based upon an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel if the factual assertions, taken as true, would demonstrate that there was a reasonable probability that the defendant would not have entered the plea except for the presence of the errors of counsel. Id. at 468-69.