State of Tennessee v. Devoris Antoine Newson

Syllabus

Pursuant to a plea agreement, the Defendant, acting pro se, entered guilty pleas to various felony offenses and received an effective sentence of six years' imprisonment. A few weeks later, the Defendant filed a motion to withdraw his guilty pleas, claiming they were unknowing and involuntarily entered because he was not advised of the consequences of the guilty pleas.1 Following a hearing, the trial court denied the Defendant's motion. For the first time in this appeal, the Defendant claims that his waiver of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was not knowingly and voluntarily entered therefore, his subsequent guilty pleas were constitutionally invalid. The Defendant additionally claims the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas and determining that his guilty pleas were knowingly and voluntarily entered. Upon our review, we conclude that the trial court's investigation of the factors bearing upon the Defendant's knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel complied with Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), and Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (2004). We further conclude that the Defendant failed to establish that manifest injustice required the withdrawal of his guilty pleas. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.