State v. Giroux
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to burglary and other crimes. Prior to sentencing, Defendant filed a motion to withdraw his pleas and his admission, alleging that his diagnosis of kleptomania in a presentence mental evaluation report constituted new evidence of a mental abnormality that raised a reasonable doubt as to his intent to commit the crimes charged. The trial court denied the motion. The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Defendant’s motion to withdraw his pleas, as the evidence of kleptomania could not raise a reasonable doubt as to Defendant’s intent to commit burglary and theft, and the kleptomania diagnosis did not require the trial court to grant Defendant a discretionary withdrawal of his pleas.
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.