Collins v. State, 47425
| Decision Date | 17 July 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 47425,47425 |
| Parties | Preston COLLINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Kansas, Appellee. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
This is an appeal in a postconviction proceeding under K.S.A. 60-1507 wherein the trial court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing. On February 20, 1970, petitioner, Preston Collins, represented by counsel, pleaded guilty to escaping from the state penitentiary without breaking as defined in K.S.A. 21-734 (Repealed, L.1969, Ch. 180, now 1973 Supp. 21-3810) and was sentenced to a trrm of three years to commence at the expiration of any sentence he was then serving. Petitioner was advised of his right to appeal, of his right to have counsel appointed for such appeal, and his right to have a transcript furnished him for such appeal. No appeal was taken. On January 12, 1972, petitioner filed the instant motion alleging two grounds or relief. The trial court examined the motion and the files and records in petitioner's case and determined that the facts alleged did not support the grounds upon which petitioner claimed he was unlawfully held in custody. On appeal petitioner specifies error in the denial of his motion as follows:
1. The imposition of both a three-year sentence and administrative sanctions (loss of good time) constituted double jeopardy.
This point was raised and disposed of as unmeritorious in State v. Williams, 208 Kan. 480, 493 P.2d 258:
'. . . (C)riminal prosecution for the crime of escape is not prohibited under the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution merely because the escapee was, upon his recapture subjected to discipline by prison authority for the prison discipline violation involved . . ..' (p. 483, 493 P.2d 261.)
2. Since no counsel represented him in filing his 60-1507 motion and since it was dismissed summarily, defendant contends that under those circumstances there was deprivation of due process to him as an indigent. K.S.A. 60-1507 requires a finding of substantial issue of fact or law raised by the motion before counsel will be appointed for an indigent or an evidentiary hearing held. Petitioner contends this is a denial of the postconviction remedy to indigents since petitioner, unskilled in the law, must...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Harlin
...for violation of prison regulations does not bar subsequent prosecution under criminal laws for the same conduct. See Collins v. State, 215 Kan. 489, 524 P.2d 715 (1974), and State v. Williams, 208 Kan. 480, 493 P.2d 258 (1972). The issue before us may be more accurately stated as being whe......
-
State v. Maze
...imposition of administrative sanctions and criminal prosecutions are not prohibited under the double jeopardy clause. Collins v. State, 215 Kan. 489, 524 P.2d 715 (1974). In State v. Quarles, 13 Kan.App.2d 51, 761 P.2d 317, rev. denied 244 Kan. 740 (1988), we held double jeopardy did not ap......
-
Hamby v. State, s. 4654
...previously imposed by prison authorities for the same escape; e. g., Alex v. State, 484 P.2d 677 (Alaska 1971); Collins v. State, 215 Kan. 489, 524 P.2d 715 (1974); State v. Millican, 84 N.M. 256, 501 P.2d 1076 (1972); Hutchison v. United States, 450 F.2d 930 (10th Cir. 1971); and United St......