CHARLESTON - A New Creek man who appealed his sentence in Mineral County Circuit Court due to a breach of a plea agreement on the part of the court will be re-sentenced by a new judge.

By Liz Beavers
lbeavers@newstribune.info
Tribune Managing Editor
CHARLESTON - A New Creek man who appealed his sentence in Mineral County Circuit Court due to a breach of a plea agreement on the part of the court will be re-sentenced by a new judge.
Glen Earnest Blacka, who was originally indicted in May 2015 on multiple accounts of sexual assault, incest, and sexual abuse, had entered into a plea agreement in October 2016, pleading guilty to three counts of sexual abuse by a parent, guardian or custodian. As part of that agreement, the remaining charges were dismissed and the state agreed to “remain silent on a recommendation at sentencing,” according to court records.
Despite that agreement, however, prosecuting attorney Cody Pancake recommended to the court during Blacka’s sentencing hearing on Feb. 13, 2017, that the defendant’s sentence “run consecutive and not concurrent.”
According to the court records, Pancake also called the crime “one of the more heinous cases that we’ve come across in recent years.”
When Blacka was sentenced to ten to 20 years for each count on Feb. 22, 2017, court records say Judge Lynn Nelson “remarked upon ‘a lot of rumors and speculations’ about things ocuring ‘up in Blackaville.”
Blacka’s attorney, Ramon Rozas, filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, “contending the state breached the plea agreement by failing to remain silent at sentencing.”
Rozas asked that Blacka either be given the right to withdraw his guilty plea or to have his sentence vacated and placed in the hands of another judge.
In the opinion released by the Supreme Court on Friday, it was noted that the high court recognizes “because a plea agreement requires a defendant to waive fundamental rights, we are compelled to hold prosecutors and courts to the most meticulous standards of both promise and performance.”
The court therefore commented on Pancake’s actions, calling them “conduct incongruous with the duties of an officer of the court.”
In arguments before the Supreme Court, however, the state called the comments “harmless error” that did not influence the sentencing proceedings.
The Supreme Court nevertheless ruled that Blacka should not only be re-sentenced, but also that another prosecutor and another be judge be appointed to do so.