Burton v. State, 30475
| Decision Date | 11 February 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 30475,30475 |
| Citation | 204 N.E.2d 218,246 Ind. 197 |
| Parties | Alvin BURTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Robert S. Baker, Sid M. Cleveland, Indianapolis, for appellant.
Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., David S. Wedding, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant has filed petition for rehearing contending this Court's opinion erred in following its recent decision in Barker v. State (1963), Ind., 191 N.E.2d 9, and in holding that if a long or unusual delay occurs before the filing of a coram nobis petition, the petitioner should give a valid and reasonable excuse for the delay stating when and how the cause was first discovered, the facts constituting the cause, and why the cause could not have been discovered previously by the exercise of due diligence.
In our earlier opinion in this case we further pointed out that appellant, wittingly or unwittingly, waited until the five year statute of limitations had run before he filed his coram nobis petition setting up that he should have been charged with other offenses than grand larceny, the offense with which he stands convicted. Appellant has failed to refute in any manner these facts which as we stated in our earlier opinion, warranted the lower court's ruling denying the writ. Appellant has asked us to overrule Barker v. State, supra, but as that was a well considered case and was in our judgment based upon correct legal principles, we cannot do so.
Appellant has also asked that we appoint an additional attorney to represent him on his petition for rehearing although the public defender has represented him on this appeal. However, it is not the law that one entitled to be furnished counsel at the expense of the state may nilly-willy compel the courts to discharge competent and conscientious counsel duly appointed to provide him with legal services, or that he has the right to designate the attorney who shall be so employed to represent him. See: In re Lee (1964), Ind., 201 N.E.2d 696; Wilder v. State (1963), Fla.App., 156 So.2d 395.
Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied and his motion for additional counsel and for extension of time to file additional petition for rehearing is overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Irvin
...The trial court need not appoint such counsel as the defendant may choose. Burton v. State (1964), 246 Ind. 197, 200, 202 N.E.2d 165, 204 N.E.2d 218; McDowell v. State (1947), 225 Ind. 495, 76 N.E.2d 249. The services of an attorney appointed by the court may not be forced upon a pauper def......