Blanton v. State, 28770
| Decision Date | 13 April 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 28770,28770 |
| Citation | 229 Ind. 701,98 N.E.2d 186 |
| Parties | BLANTON v. STATE. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Chester Blanton, Michigan City, for appellant.
J. Emmett McManamon, Atty. Gen., for appellee.
By his verified petition petitioner shows that he was regularly charged with robbery and automobile banditry in the Marion Criminal Court, Division 1 about March 7, 1945. A trial was had on November 8, 9 and 10, 1945, resulting in a disagreement and discharge of the jury. Another trial thereon was had on January 28, 29 and 30, 1946, resulting in a verdict of guilty and judgment sentencing petitioner to the Indiana State Prison for not less than ten nor more than twenty-five years. A motion for new trial was filed, and overruled by the court. On June 25, 1946 petitioner filed a motion to vacate the ruling on the motion for new trial which was sustained on June 26, 1946, and upon being further advised the court overruled the motion again.
Petitioner claims he was unable to get a complete record for an appeal of his case within the time allowed by law. That he filed in the trial court a petition for writ of error coram nobis on March 8, 1948 which was heard and denied by that court on January 10, 1949. That he then filed his petition in this court seeking to mandate the trial court to grant him a 'full hearing on the merits of his coram nobis petition' or to provide him with a 'transcript of the record of the coram nobis hearing' for an appeal thereof. That this court thereafter denied petitioner's prayer for pauper appeal. (The decision in that matter will be found in Ind.Sup., 86 N.E.2d 84.)
Petitioner avers facts indicating that he then filed his habeas corpus proceeding in the Federal Court, which was dismissed because he had not exhausted his state remedies by asking for a delayed appeal as provided for in Sec. 9-3305, Burns 1942 Repl. Supplement.
He prays for permission to take a delayed appeal.
It is not the duty of this court to advise a litigant in advance as to what is essential or non-essential to be in a record on appeal. It is enough to say that any appellant needs the service of a competent attorney to prepare and present his appeal. There are many cases and many rules of court on this subject. It is no exaggeration to say that a layman who elects to act as his own attorney accepts a great burden. When such layman acts under the disability of imprisonment the burden is even greater. But, of course, he has a right to accept the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Faretta v. California
...913 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.); Lockard v. State, 92 Idaho 813, 451 P.2d 1014; People v. Nelson, 47 Ill.2d 570, 268 N.E.2d 2; Blanton v. State, 229 Ind. 701, 98 N.E.2d 186; Westberry v. State, 254 A.2d 44 (Me.); Allen v. Commonwealth, 324 Mass. 558, 87 N.E.2d 192; People v. Haddad, 306 Mich. 556, 1......
-
Moody v. State
...these burdens and hazards he could have easily avoided.’ “Yager v. State, 437 N.E.2d 454, 458 (Ind.1982) (quoting Blanton v. State, 229 Ind. 701, 703, 98 N.E.2d 186, 187 (1951)).”597 So.2d at 745 (emphasis added). See also Ex parte Moody, 684 So.2d 114 (Ala.1996). This Court held on direct ......
-
Moody v. State
...these burdens and hazards he could have easily avoided.'"Yager v. State, 437 N.E.2d 454, 458 (Ind. 1982) (quoting Blanton v. State, 229 Ind. 701, 703, 98 N.E.2d 186, 187 (1951))."597 So. 2d at 745 (emphasis added). See also Ex parte Moody, 684 So. 2d 114 (Ala. 1996). This Court held on dire......
-
Wright v. State
...to his position," we noted in yet another opinion, a "defendant may represent himself if he so desires." Blanton v. State , 229 Ind. 701, 703, 98 N.E.2d 186, 187 (1951). The past, then, is replete with affirmations of the right to legal self-representation. But many of the historical reason......