State v. Lopez
Annotate this CasePursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pled guilty to child endangerment causing bodily injury. The plea agreement recommended a deferred judgment and probation. At the sentencing hearing, however, without objection by defense counsel, the prosecutor offered into evidence two photographs of the child-victim’s injuries and then used them on cross-examination of Defendant’s witnesses. Further, without objection, both the victim’s father and a guardian ad litem (GAL) gave victim-impact statements urging incarceration. The prosecutor never overtly advocated for a tougher sentence or mentioned incarceration as an alternative to probation. The court sentenced Defendant for an indeterminate prison term of up to five years. Defendant appealed, asserting that the prosecutor breached the plea agreement during the sentencing phase. The Supreme Court vacated Defendant’s sentence and remanded for resentencing, holding (1) the prosecutor breached the plea agreement by gratuitously introducing photos not otherwise before the court and using the photos on cross-examination to signal that Defendant deserved incarceration rather than probation; and (2) the district court properly received victim-impact statements from the child-victim’s father and the GAL.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.