State v. Bokenyi
Annotate this CaseThe State filed a criminal complaint alleging ten counts against Defendant. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pled guilty to three of the charges against him. After he was sentenced, Defendant filed a postconviction motion arguing that the State materially and substantially breached the plea agreement by implying that the court should impose a longer sentence than the term of imprisonment the State recommended and that his trial counsel had been ineffective for failing to object and for failing to consult with him regarding the alleged breaches. The circuit court denied relief. The court of appeals reversed, concluding that the prosecutor’s comments at the sentencing hearing materially and substantially breached the plea agreement and that Defendant’s trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the prosecutor’s comments during the sentencing hearing did not constitute a material and substantial breach of the plea agreement.
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.