Cooper v. Town of Appalachia
| Decision Date | 23 September 1926 |
| Parties | COOPER v. TOWN OF APPALACHIA. |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
1. CRIMINAL LAW — Appeal and Error — Appeal where Judgment Rendered on a Plea of Guilty. — Ordinarily an appeal will not lie from a judgment of conviction in a criminal case rendered upon a confession of guilt. But before receiving a plea of guilty the court should see that it is made by a person of competent intelligence, freely and voluntarily, and with a full understanding of its nature and effect, and of the facts on which it is founded.
2. CRIMINAL LAW — Jury — Right to Jury Trial — Punishment. — At common law the jury only passed on the guilt or innocence of the accused, and the court fixed the punishment, and this is the kind of jury trial which is preserved by the Constitution.
3. SENTENCE AND PUNISHMENT — Power of Judge to Fix Penalty. — The power of the legislature to impose upon judges the duty to inflict penalties, within the limitations prescribed by statute, after the finding of a verdict of guilty by a jury, cannot be doubted. But in Virginia the legislature has not done so. On the contrary, section 4784 of the Code of 1919 gives to the accused the right to have a jury not only to pass on his guilt or innocence, but also on the measure of his punishment.
4. CRIMINAL LAW — Intoxicating Liquor — Plea of Guilty — Waiver of Jury Trial Under Section 35 of the Prohibition Statute (Acts of 1924, Chapter 407, Page 593) — Case at Bar. — In the instant case accused was convicted of a violation of a prohibition ordinance upon his plea of guilty. Accused applied for an appeal under section 35 of the prohibition statute (Acts of 1924, ch. 407, page 593) which was refused him.
Held: That by his plea of guilty accused waived his constitutional right (Const. of 1902, sec. 8) to have the jury pass upon his guilt or innocence and his statutory right (Code of 1919, sec. 4784) to have the degree of his punishment ascertained by a jury; and that an appeal to the circuit court under Acts of 1924, p. 593, did not lie.
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Wise county.
The opinion states the case.
W. W. G. Dotson, for the plaintiff in error.
Morton & Parker, for the defendant in error.
The town of Appalachia adopted the State prohibition law as far as applicable, as an ordinance of the town. Thereafter the plaintiff in error was arrested on a warrant issued by the mayor of said town, charging that the defendant "did unlawfully keep, store, sell and expose for sale ardent spirits in violation of the ordinance of said town." The warrant was read to the defendant, and he "replied that he did not want any trial; that he was guilty and desired and * * * did enter a plea of guilty to the warrant with the charge aforesaid." Thereupon the mayor sentenced him to "six months in jail to work on the county road force" and to pay a fine of five hundred dollars and the costs. Three days thereafter the defendant applied to the said mayor for an appeal to the Circuit Court of Wise county, but he refused to grant it. Three days thereafter he applied to the judge of the Circuit Court of Wise county for a writ of mandamus to compel the said mayor to grant him an appeal, but the judge refused to award said writ.
There are four assignments of error, none of which assails the validity of the statute or the power of the trial court, but we need only consider whether the petitioner was entitled to an appeal.
Section 35 of the prohibition statute (Acts 1924, ch. 407, p. 593) grants the right to an appeal in the following lnaguage: * * * "mayors, police justices and others having jurisdiction for the trial of cases for the violation of the ordinances of the cities and towns shall have jurisdiction to try cases arising under ordinances passed by their respective cities and towns as hereinafter provided, with the right of appeal to the defendant to the court having jurisdiction to try such appeal."
But it is said that the accused is not entitled to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Mull
...Va. 787, 173 S.E. 543 (1934), where a divided Virginia Supreme Court overruled its earlier contrary holding in Cooper v. Town of Appalachia, 145 Va. 861, 134 S.E. 591 (1926). In other states an appeal from the conviction resting on the plea of guilt has been held precluded by local statutor......
-
Dickerson v. Commonwealth
...and that their conviction as aforesaid was attended with no apparent injustice, " and relying upon the case of Cooper v. Town of Appalachia, 145 Va. 861, 134 S. E. 591, held that they had waived the right to an appeal by pleading guilty, and dismissed the appeal as having been improvidently......
-
Dickerson, Etc. v. Commonwealth
...of the Peace or Trial Justice — Plea of Guilty as Waiver of Right to Appeal — Case at Bar. — The rule laid down in Cooper Town of Appalachia, 145 Va. 861, 134 S.E. 591, to the effect that a plea of guilty before a justice of the peace or a trial justice is a waiver by the accused of the rig......
-
Fogg v. Com.
...At common law the jury determined the guilt or innocence of the accused and the court fixed the punishment. Cooper v. Town of Appalachia, 145 Va. 861, 864, 134 S.E. 591, 592 (1926); Bracy v. Commonwealth, 119 Va. 867, 872, 89 S.E. 144, 145 (1916). Thus, the constitutional right to a jury tr......