Ronald Lee Neslein pleaded guilty to theft by taking and entering an automobile with intent to commit theft. The trial court sentenced him to twenty years confinement for theft by taking and imposed a five-year concurrent sentence for entering an automobile. Neslein subsequently moved to set aside the sentences as void. The trial court denied the motion, and Neslein appeals. For reasons that follow, we affirm. Neslein was charged by accusation with theft by taking motor vehicle parts or components with a value exceeding $100 and entering an automobile with intent to commit theft.1 During the trial, Neslein decided to plead guilty, and the trial court held a plea hearing, at which it asked the prosecutor to set forth a factual basis for the plea.
Summarizing the facts of the case, the prosecutor asserted that, on July 30, 2005, the owner of a car dealership discovered that various parts had been taken from a Chevrolet Cavalier on the sales lot. Specifically, the two front quarter panels, the hood, the radiator, a tire, the interior dome light, and the radio had been removed. The investigation led the police to Neslein, who had made several incriminating statements to a friend about obtaining parts from the car lot for use on his own Chevrolet Cavalier. With Neslein’s consent, officers searched his home and found that several parts matching those taken from the dealership including the hood, the front quarter panels, the radiator, and the tire had been installed on his car or were located in his yard.
