Beard v. State, 30061
| Decision Date | 31 October 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 30061,30061 |
| Citation | 177 N.E.2d 589,242 Ind. 222 |
| Parties | Taylor BEARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
James T. Hooper, Sr., Lawrenceburg, for appellant.
Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Patrick D. Sullivan, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.
This is an appeal from a judgment by which the trial court denied a petition for writ of error coram nobis.
The appellant was, on October 15, 1947, upon his plea of guilty, committed to the Indiana State Prison for the crime of having inflicted physical injury while engaged in the commission of a robbery.
As cause for appeal, appellant argues:
1. That the trial court erred in not appointing pauper counsel for the appellant.
2. That the trial court did not fully inform the appellant as to his constitutional rights with respect to the presentation of a defense to the crime for which he was charged.
3. That his plea of guilty was prompted by fear, occasioned by physical abuse by the arresting officers and because of the danger of mob violence and upon the advice of police officers, and therefore such plea was not his free and voluntary act.
There is no merit to any of the contentions asserted by appellant.
First: The colloquy with respect to the appointment of counsel between the court and the appellant at the time of the arraignment, as it appears of record, is as follows:
[By the court:]
'Before reading the affidavit to you I want to ask you some questions.
'
'
The only conclusion that an ordinarily reasonable person could draw from the above colloquy is that appellant did not want an attorney even though he knew that he would be provided an attorney at public expense, if he so requested. The court is not obliged to appoint an attorney for an accused against his will, during arraignment.
Second: With regard to appellant's contention that he was not fully informed with regard to his constitutional rights, it appears from the record that the trial court was meticulous in its instructions to the defendant with regard to his constitutional rights at the time of his arraignment. Furthermore, appellant does not now in this appeal direct this court's attention to, or argue that he was not informed regarding, any particular constitutional right at the time of his arraignment. Therefore, for each of the above reasons no error is presented with respect to this issue.
Third: With respect to appellant's contention that his plea...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beatty v. State, 30283
...is well settled that on appeal this court will not weigh conflicting evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. Beard v. State (1961), 242 Ind. 222, 177 N.E.2d 589; Yarber v. State (1962), 242 Ind. 616, 179 N.E.2d 882; Lander v. State (1958), 238 Ind. 680, 154 N.E.2d From the foregoin......
-
Wells v. State
... ... Yarber v. State (1962), 242 Ind. 616, 179 N.E.2d 882; Beard v. State (1961), 242 Ind. 222, ... 177 N.E.2d 589. On this issue, this court has recently said: ... [245 Ind. 185] '* * * [I]t is the province of ... ...
-
Seal v. State, 30469
...evidence. That function is the exclusive duty of the trier of the fact. Beatty v. State (1963), Ind., 194 N.E.2d 727; Beard v. State (1961), 242 Ind. 222, 177 N.E.2d 589. The first specification of the appellant's motion for new trial alleges that the finding of the court is not sustained b......
-
Bell v. State
...in the testimony which this court, on appeal, will not weigh. Yarber v. State (1962), 242 Ind. 616, 179 N.E.2d 882; Beard v. State (1961), 242 Ind. 222, 177 N.E.2d 589; Lander v. State (1958), 238 Ind. 680, 154 N.E.2d Furthermore, in this case we are confronted by the fact that upon his arr......