Acceptance of Alford Guilty Pleas

In North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), the United States Supreme Court concluded that it is constitutionally permissible for a defendant who does not admit guilt to enter a plea of guilty. Such a plea, now known as an Alford plea, is constitutional as long as the defendant “voluntarily, knowingly, and understandingly” enters the plea and there is a “strong factual basis” for the plea. The Court left to each state how to handle such pleas—whether to prohibit them, to allow each judge to decide whether to accept them, or to require their acceptance. Which category is North Carolina in? North Carolina’s statutes have seemed clear to me. G.S. 15A-1023(c) addresses “open” pleas, meaning the defendant pleads guilty to the charges without a deal about sentencing. The statute provides that the judge “must” accept the plea as long as it the product of “informed choice” (essentially, it is voluntary, knowing, and understanding) and there is a factual basis for the plea. G.S. 15A-1022(b) addresses pleas when the State and the defendant have agreed on a sentence, thus limiting the judge’s sentencing discretion. In that instance, the judge may reject the plea. This dual approach preserves the prosecutor’s discretion on the charges to pursue, the defendant’s autonomy about whether to accept or contest the charges, and the judge’s authority to determine the sentence. A recent Court of Appeals decision, State v. Chandler, ___ N.C. App. ___ (Apr. 16, 2019), may cloud this area. In a two-to-one decision, the court upheld [...]