Whether the State's misrepresentation that the victims would support a SSOSA rendered Petitioner's plea involuntary, in violation of the Due Process Clause

The State charged Petitioner with four sex offenses, and Petitioner engaged in plea negotiation with the prosecutor . The prosecutor repeatedly told Petitioner that the victims and their mother would endorse a treatment -based sentenc e, i.e., a sex offender sentencing alternative sentence (“SSOSA”), if he pleaded guilty to the two top counts . Petitioner pleaded guilty based on those repeated assurances. B ut at sentencing, neither the victims nor their mother endorse d a SSOSA . Instead, they requested a life in prison sentence . Petitioner immediately moved to withdraw his plea , arguing the prosecutor’s misrepresentations induced his plea and rendered it involuntary . The trial court denied his motion and sentenced Petitioner to life in prison. The question presen ted is: Whether the State’s misrepresentation that the victims would support a SSOSA rendered Petitioner’s plea involuntary, in violation of the Due Process Clause.