Colbert v. State
Decision Date | 13 November 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 2,No. 57001,57001,2 |
Citation | 486 S.W.2d 219 |
Parties | Victor Arture COLBERT, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Patrick Horner, Auxvasse, for movant-appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Preston Dean, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
Appellant was charged in the Circuit Court of Callaway County, Missouri, with armed robbery, burglary and stealing.
On November 11, 1969, appellant entered pleas of guilty, and on February 16, 1970, was sentenced to twenty years on the robbery charge, five years on the burglary charge, and five years on the stealing charge, with said sentences to run concurrently.
On October 14, 1970, appellant filed in the Circuit Court of Callaway County, Missouri, his motion to vacate under V.A.M.R. 27.25 and 27.26, amended the motion on April 8, 1971, and an evidentiary hearing was held on April 8, 1971. The motion to vacate was denied and an appeal to this Court followed.
The appeal having been taken to this Court prior to January 1, 1972, the effective date of new Article V of the Constitution, we have jurisdiction pursuant to then Art. V, § 3 of the Missouri Constitution, V.A.M.S.
The essence of appellant's petition for relief is that, for various reasons stated in his motion, he should be permitted to withdraw the pleas of guilty entered and accepted on November 11, 1969. This case, because of the record made by the trial court on said date (Cf. Flood v. State, Mo.Sup., 476 S.W.2d 529, 535, 536; United States v. Cody, 8th Cir., 438 F.2d 287), presents this Court with an opportunity to eliminate from post-conviction judicial process in Missouri much unnecessary and time-consuming activity.
In State of Missouri v. Turley, 8th Cir., 443 F.2d 1313, at 1318 (cert. den., 404 U.S. 965, 92 S.Ct. 336, 30 L.Ed.2d 284), the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Woods
...v. McKnight, 486 S.W.2d 415 (Mo.1972); State v. Lee, 486 S.W.2d 412 (Mo.1972); State v. Williams, 486 S.W.2d 221 (Mo.1972); Colbert v. State, 486 S.W.2d 219 (Mo.1972); Patton v. State, 486 S.W.2d 204 (Mo.1972); Brown v. State, 485 S.W.2d 424 (Mo.1972); Tyler v. State, 485 S.W.2d 102 (Mo.197......
-
Smith v. State
...was caused by their efforts in behalf of the defendant. Respondent in its motion to dismiss called attention to our holding in Colbert v. State, 486 S.W.2d 219 (mo.1972) and then stated the following: 'An examination of the above-mentioned guilty plea and sentencing in Cause No. 463--S, sho......
-
Weaver v. State, KCD
...are made a part of this record, and the court finds that there is no legal basis for any additional evidentiary hearing. See Colbert v. State, 486 S.W.2d 219. Movant's motion is therefore Appellant contends that the court erred by denying his motion without an evidentiary hearing, and by fa......
-
Fisk v. State, 35366
...record conclusively shows that he is not entitled to relief. Rule 27.26(e), Loflin v. State, 492 S.W.2d 770 (Mo.banc 1973), Colbert v. State, 486 S.W.2d 219 (Mo.1972). A motion of this kind is an independent civil action governed by the Rules of Civil Procedure insofar as applicable. Rule 2......