The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed a Superior Court order denying Brian Smith's request for post-conviction relief in a case involving multiple charges of child molestation spanning several years. The high court issued its decision in *State v. Brian Smith* (R.I. 2025), case number 2024-347-C.A., concluding that "cause has not been shown" for granting the relief sought by the defendant.
Smith had sought declaratory and injunctive relief in the context of ongoing criminal proceedings in which he had entered a plea of nolo contendere to two counts of second-degree child molestation. The Supreme Court's brief order affirmed the lower court's denial of this request without extensive analysis, stating only that it had "reviewed the parties' arguments" before reaching its decision.
The case has a complex procedural history involving multiple criminal charges filed across different jurisdictions and time periods. According to the court's opinion, Smith's legal troubles began on Feb. 10, 2015, when he was charged by criminal information in what the court refers to as "the Newport case." These initial charges included one count of simple assault and one count of second-degree child molestation, arising from an incident that allegedly occurred on or about July 19, 2014.
Following a jury trial, Smith was found guilty on April 4, 2016, of the lesser-included offense of simple assault and a second count of simple assault. The court sentenced him to serve two years at the Adult Correctional Institutions for these convictions.
While the Newport case was still pending, additional charges emerged. On Nov. 2, 2015, Smith faced a second criminal information in what the court termed "the Providence case." These charges stemmed from allegations made by Smith's niece, who came forward to report that Smith had sexually assaulted her in 2004 when she was nine years old.
In the Providence case, Smith entered a plea of nolo contendere to one count of second-degree child molestation. The court sentenced him to 10 years at the Adult Correctional Institutions, with two years to serve, eight years suspended, and 10 years of probation. A nolo contendere plea, also known as "no contest," means the defendant does not admit guilt but does not dispute the charges.
The court documents indicate that Smith's legal challenges continued beyond these initial cases. Approximately one year later, on Nov. 17, 2016, he was charged with four additional counts of second-degree child molestation in what appears to be yet another criminal proceeding, though the court order cuts off before providing complete details about this third case.
The Supreme Court's decision references a more detailed account of the facts in a related case, *Rhode Island Department of Attorney General v. Smith*, 330 A.3d 38 (R.I. 2025). This suggests that Smith's case may have involved civil proceedings in addition to the criminal charges, possibly related to sex offender registration or other regulatory matters typically handled by the Attorney General's office.
Post-conviction relief requests, such as the declaratory and injunctive relief sought by Smith, are typically filed by defendants who believe their constitutional rights were violated during the original proceedings or who have discovered new evidence that could affect their convictions. These requests can seek to overturn convictions, reduce sentences, or obtain other forms of legal remedy.
The Supreme Court's decision to affirm the denial suggests that Smith's arguments for relief did not meet the legal standards required for such extraordinary remedies. Courts generally require defendants seeking post-conviction relief to demonstrate substantial constitutional violations or other compelling circumstances that would justify reopening concluded criminal cases.
The brief nature of the Supreme Court's order indicates that the court found Smith's arguments insufficient to warrant detailed analysis or discussion. When appellate courts conclude that "cause has not been shown," they typically mean that the appellant has failed to present adequate legal or factual grounds for the relief requested.
This case illustrates the challenges defendants face when seeking post-conviction relief, particularly in cases involving serious charges like child molestation. Courts maintain high standards for granting such relief to preserve the finality of criminal judgments while still protecting defendants' constitutional rights.
The multiple cases and charges against Smith span from 2014 to at least 2016, involving allegations from different time periods and different alleged victims. The involvement of a family member as an alleged victim, combined with the serious nature of the charges, likely influenced both the prosecution's approach and the court's handling of the various proceedings.
Smith's use of nolo contendere pleas in at least one of the cases allowed him to avoid admitting guilt while accepting the legal consequences of the charges. This type of plea is sometimes used in cases where defendants want to resolve criminal charges without creating admissions that could be used against them in related civil proceedings.
The Supreme Court's affirmance of the denial of post-conviction relief effectively ends this particular avenue of appeal for Smith, though other legal remedies might potentially remain available depending on the specific circumstances of his case and the timing of various procedural deadlines.