Eric Sean Roloson v. Washington

The State charged Petitioner with four sex offenses, and Petitioner engaged in plea negotiation with the prosecutor. The prosecutor repeatedly told Petitioner that the victims and their mother would endorse a treatment-based sentence, i.e., a sex offender sentencing alternative sentence (“SSOSA”), if he pleaded guilty to the two top counts. Petitioner pleaded guilty based on those repeated assurances. But at sentencing, neither the victims nor their mother endorsed a SSOSA. Instead, they requested a life in prison sentence. Petitioner immediately moved to withdraw his plea, arguing the prosecutor’s misrepresentations induced his plea and rendered it involuntary. The trial court denied his motion and sentenced Petitioner to life in prison. The question presented is: Whether the State’s misrepresentation that the victims would support a SSOSA rendered Petitioner’s plea involuntary, in violation of the Due Process Clause.