State v. Whitehorn

¶50 I respectfully dissent from the Court‘s opinion. My two primary reasons for doing so are that the Court 1) improperly applies the “plain error” doctrine to allow Whitehorn to change his double jeopardy theory on appeal from that presented to the District Court; and 2) fails to take into account that this is a postconviction relief proceeding to which certain statutes-in addition to the time-bar statute-and case law apply.

¶51 It is important to keep in mind the procedural underpinnings of this case. Whitehorn was sentenced on convictions entered on guilty pleas in 1995 and did not appeal.…