from the District Court of Natrona County The Honorable
Daniel L. Forgey, Judge
Representing Appellant: Office of the State Public Defender:
Diane M. Lozano, State Public Defender; Tina N. Olson, Chief
Appellate Counsel; Kirk A. Morgan, Senior Assistant Appellate
Counsel. Argument by Mr. Morgan.
Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Attorney General;
David L. Delicath, Deputy Attorney General; Christyne M.
Martens, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Emily Elliott,
Student Intern. Argument by Ms. Elliott.
BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.
Appellant, Joseph Scott McNaughton, challenges his conviction
of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance,
methamphetamine, in violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§
35-7-1031(a)(i) and 35-7-1042 (LexisNexis 2013). He contends
he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm.
Mr. McNaughton presents a single issue:
Was Mr. McNaughton provided effective assistance of counsel?
Mr. McNaughton's participation in a conspiracy to deliver
methamphetamine was discovered during an investigation of
Preston and Ernesto Montoya by the Wyoming Division of
Criminal Investigation (DCI) and the federal Drug Enforcement
Administration. The investigating agents used, among other
tools, a court-authorized wiretap to record phone calls and
text messages from cell phones. During the course of the
investigation, the agents intercepted communications between
Mr. McNaughton and Preston Montoya regarding methamphetamine.
Based on the intercepted communications and surveillance of
Mr. McNaughton and his girlfriend, Teresa Porter, DCI
obtained a warrant to search Ms. Porter's residence. Upon
execution of the warrant, DCI arrested Mr. McNaughton and Ms.
Porter and seized Ms. Porter's cell phone. Ms.
Porter's phone contained incriminating text messages
between her and Mr. McNaughton regarding the sale of
Mr. McNaughton was charged with one count of conspiracy to
deliver a controlled substance in violation of Wyo. Stat.
Ann. §§ 35-7-1031(a)(i) and 35-7-1042. The court
appointed a public defender to represent him. After charging
Mr. McNaughton, the State sent defense counsel a letter
notifying counsel of the procedure for obtaining the evidence
against Mr. McNaughton. The letter informed counsel that he
could provide the State a "hard drive with at least 200
GB of storage" or, in the alternative, he could arrange
to view the discovery in person at the United States
Attorney's Office in Casper. Defense counsel did not
provide any type of storage medium to acquire the discovery,
nor did he contact anyone to arrange access to view the
discovery at the U.S. Attorney's Office.
The State subsequently sent a formal plea offer to defense
counsel. The State proposed that, in return for Mr.
McNaughton's guilty plea to the felony conspiracy charge,
the State would agree to recommend a sentence of five to
eight years in prison. Mr. McNaughton rejected the plea
offer, and the State did not present any subsequent offers.
Following Mr. McNaughton's rejection, defense counsel
filed a motion for a bill of particulars. In response, the
State asserted that the motion was untimely and that the
information and accompanying affidavit adequately apprised
Mr. McNaughton of the allegations against him. The State also
noted that its evidence against Mr. ...