NY appeals court reverses manslaughter conviction

A state appeals court has reversed a homicide conviction because the guilty plea was flawed.

Defendant Ryan Oldorff pleaded guilty in September 2023 before Schoharie County Court Judge Ryan McAllister of first-degree manslaughter.

Oldorff was originally indicted on charges of second-degree murder, and first-degree manslaughter for fatally shooting his father in July 2019.

He was initially sent to an adolescent psychiatric facility where he underwent a psychiatric evaluation.

Two psychologists reported that Oldorff was diagnosed with several mental health conditions including fetal alcohol syndrome, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, pervasive developmental disorder, mood disorder, reactive attachment disorder, intermittent explosive disorder and moderate intellectual disability.

Testing showed that Oldorff read at a first-grade level and his “insight and judgment are clearly poor,” according to a recent decision by the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court, Third Department.

The evaluation determined that Oldorff’s “cognitive limitations associated with moderate developmental disability substantially impair his capacity to have a rational understanding of the proceedings against him and to properly assist counsel with the preparation of his defense.”

The psychologists concluded that Oldorff “is able to learn concrete factual information but does not appear able to integrate that information and apply it in a reasoned manner to assist his attorney in developing his own defense.”

Oldorff was committed to an intensive treatment facility where he attended court procedure classes to gain knowledge of criminal proceedings.

In December 2020, Oldorff had a second psychiatric evaluation, and a retention hearing was held in February 2021.

The psychologist reported that Oldorff obtained the average score of an intellectually disabled individual who is competent to stand trial and had gained some knowledge regarding criminal court proceedings.

But she testified that Oldorff did not have an idea of how he might be defended against the charges, was unsure of some of the roles of court personnel and was unsure how his attorney wanted to proceed.

The psychologist’s opinion was that Oldorff “was not ready to stand trial (and) was not competent to stand trial,” according to the decision.

In February 2022, Oldorff was evaluated a third time and was determined to be mentally competent to stand trial.

In June 2022, Oldorff pleaded guilty in County Court to first-degree manslaughter.  Subsequently, state Supreme Court Justice P. Lynch granted a defense motion to vacate the plea.

No additional competency examinations were requested or administered, and, in June 2023, Oldorff entered an Alford plea to first-degree manslaughter.

An Alford plea involves an admission of guilt by a defendant to a lesser criminal charge, while simultaneously expressing their innocence. In essence, the defendant admits that the prosecutor has enough evidence to convict them of a more serious crime, while at the same time pleading to a lesser charge, thereby avoiding a possible worse sentence if convicted of the more serious crime.

County Court accepted the plea and sentenced Oldorff to 20 years in prison, followed by five years of post-release supervision.

Oldorff appealed to the Third Department, which vacated the conviction.

His appellate attorney argued that the guilty plea was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent because his intellectual and developmental disabilities rendered him incapable of understanding the proceedings.

The issue was unpreserved for appellate review, but Oldorff’s attorney argued that statements Oldorff made during the plea colloquy triggered the narrow exception to the preservation requirement.

“Upon consideration, we are persuaded that his statements call into question whether his plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary so as to generate this narrow exception to the preservation requirement,” the Third Department found.

“Notwithstanding the determination that defendant was competent to stand trial, the third psychiatric evaluation report cast serious doubts on defendant’s ability to enter a knowing and voluntary plea,” the court ruled.

“Under the circumstances, a more probing inquiry was warranted here to ensure that defendant understood the constitutional rights he was waiving,” the court wrote.

“As there is no affirmative showing on the record that defendant understood and voluntarily waived his constitutional rights when he entered his guilty plea, the judgment of County Court convicting defendant of manslaughter in the first degree and sentencing defendant thereon should be reversed, the plea vacated and the matter remitted for further proceedings,” the Third Department ruled.

[email protected] / (585) 232-20235