Melvin Eugene Teemer appeals the order denying his pro se motion to withdraw his negotiated guilty plea to one count of aggravated sodomy. Teemer contends that the trial court manifestly abused its discretion in denying his motion because the state failed to show that he understood the nature of the charge against him and the consequences of his plea. We disagree and affirm. Once a defendant challenges the validity of his guilty plea, the burden falls on the state to show that the defendant intelligently and voluntarily entered the plea. The query is whether the defendant freely and voluntarily entered the plea with an understanding of i the charges against him and ii the consequences of his plea. The state may meet its burden through use of the transcript of the guilty plea hearing or through use of extrinsic evidence. We will not disturb the trial court’s ruling on the question absent a manifest abuse of discretion.1 “The trial court is the final arbiter of all factual issues raised by the evidence, and after sentence is pronounced a guilty plea may be withdrawn only to correct a manifest injustice.”2 “If evidence supports the trial court’s findings, we must affirm.”3 The record in the case at bar shows that before entering his plea, Teemer signed a written Advice and Waiver of Rights “waiver form”, on which he responded “yes” to the question, “Do you fully understand what you are charged with in this case” The charge, aggravated sodomy, was then stated on the waiver form. It also listed the various rights Teemer was waiving by pleading guilty, and he indicated that he understood that he was waiving those rights. Teemer further indicated that his attorney had fully explained to him the maximum possible sentence, including any enhanced or mandatory minimum sentences that applied,4 as well as the fact that he could be imprisoned for as much as 20 years if he pled guilty. Teemer acknowledged that he was not mentally disabled or under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or medication, and that his attorney had reviewed and fully explained the Plea and Sentence Recommendation “plea sheet”, which he also signed.
By signing the plea sheet, Teemer indicated that he understood that he had been charged with aggravated sodomy and attempted rape; that in exchange for his guilty plea to aggravated sodomy, an order of nolle prosequi would be entered on the attempted rape charge; and that his total sentence would be twenty years, with ten to serve in prison and ten on probation. The plea sheet stated that the prison term would be served concurrently with the remainder of his probation for an unspecified offense, which was being revoked. Teemer also agreed to “provide truthful testimony about what his co-defendant did.”
