State v. Lubens Bienaime

Syllabus

In these consolidated appeals, the defendant, Lubens Bienaime, appealed from a 1993 judgment of conviction following a jury trial for second-degree sexual assault, and a 2019 Superior Court judgment adjudicating him a probation violator. The defendant was convicted of second-degree sexual assault and sentenced in 1993 but failed to appear for execution of sentence. When defendant reappeared in 2017, the state moved to have him adjudicated a probation violator for his failure to appear in 1993. In appealing his underlying conviction, defendant argued that the trial justice erred by admitting certain evidence contrary to the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence, and by denying defendant's motion for a new trial based upon the assertion that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The Supreme Court held that defendant had failed to properly invoke the jurisdiction of the Court because his appeal was untimely under Article I, Rule 4(b) of the Supreme Court Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal accordingly. In appealing the adjudication of probation violation, defendant argued that he could not legally be adjudicated a probation violator because the violative behavior occurred prior to execution of his sentence, and therefore he was not yet on probation. The defendant argued in the alternative that even if he were on probation in 1993, the state's violation notice was untimely because his probationary period had since lapsed. The Supreme Court held that the terms of defendant's probation attached when the trial justice announced his sentence in 1993, and that he could therefore be adjudged a probation violator for his failure to appear. The Supreme Court further held that the state's violation notice was timely because the warrant that issued for defendant's arrest in 1993 when he failed to appear tolled defendant's probationary period until he reappeared in 2017. Therefore, the Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court judgments.