Daniels v. State, 85S00-8712-PC-1186

Decision Date29 December 1988
Docket NumberNo. 85S00-8712-PC-1186,85S00-8712-PC-1186
Citation531 N.E.2d 1173
PartiesPhillip DANIELS, Appellant (Petitioner below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Respondent below).
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

Susan K. Carpenter, Public Defender, Kenneth L. Bird, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Mary Dreyer, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

PIVARNIK, Justice.

On August 14, 1978, Phillip Gordon Daniels pleaded guilty to second degree murder pursuant to a plea recommendation which provided the State would dismiss a felony murder count and Daniels would receive a life sentence. On May 14, 1985, Daniels filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief, which was subsequently denied. Daniels directly appeals that denial claiming his guilty plea was not entered knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily.

An appellant is entitled to the reversal of a denial of post-conviction relief only when the evidence is without conflict and leads unerringly to a conclusion contrary to the one reached by the trial court. Champion v. State (1985), Ind., 478 N.E.2d 681, 682-83.

Daniels maintains the plea was made under the coercive pressure of Prosecutor Thomas J. Mattern's threat of capital punishment which had no legitimate basis. Daniels claims Prosecutor Mattern told him or implied to him that he would seek the death penalty if Daniels did not plead guilty. Daniels stated he pleaded guilty to avoid the death penalty. Here, both Daniels and the State agree there was no possibility the death penalty could have been imposed.

It is true that a bargained plea, motivated by an improper threat, is to be deemed illusory and a denial of substantive rights. Champion, 478 N.E.2d at 683. At the moment the plea is entered, the State must possess the power to carry out any threat which was a factor in obtaining the plea agreement which was accepted. The lack of that real power is what makes the threat illusory and causes the representation to take on the characteristics of a trick. Id.

However, at the hearing on the post-conviction petition, Prosecutor Mattern stated while he probably talked with Daniels since Daniels was a witness against his co-defendant, he did not remember whether they discussed penalties. The post-conviction court found no death penalty threat was made to Daniels. In its Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the trial court stated:

Finally, the Court has considered and rejected the Petitioner's claim that he was threatened with the death penalty. The Indiana Statute had been ruled unconstitutional almost one year prior to the charge against Petitioner. The only person with any memory of such a threat was the Petitioner. Petitioner[']s testimony that he received such a threat and didn't tell his attorney, or even ask his attorney of the possibility, is beyond the pale of reason.

Daniels challenges the post-conviction court's conclusion that he was not threatened with the death...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Powers v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • March 30, 1993
    ...only when the evidence is without conflict and leads solely to a result different from that reached by the trial court. Daniels v. State (1988), Ind., 531 N.E.2d 1173. In post-conviction proceedings, an issue which could have been but was not raised in the defendant's direct appeal is waive......
  • Steele v. Duckworth
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana
    • August 16, 1994
    ...a bargained plea, motivated by an improper threat, is deemed to be illusory and is a denial of substantive rights. Daniels v. State (1988), Ind., 531 N.E.2d 1173, 1174. At the moment the plea is entered, the State must possess the power to carry out any threat which was a factor in obtainin......
  • Weatherford v. State, 79A02-9108-PC-350
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • August 5, 1992
    ...only when the evidence is without conflict and leads solely to a result different from that reached by the trial court. Daniels v. State (1988), Ind., 531 N.E.2d 1173. Weatherford was adjudicated an habitual criminal under the following Habitual criminals--Life sentence. Every person who, a......
  • Davis v. State
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 31, 1996
    ...(one may not be convicted and sentenced for both felony murder and the accompanying felony of robbery). Davis also cites Daniels v. State, 531 N.E.2d 1173 (Ind.1988), for the proposition that a guilty plea is invalid if induced by the fear of greater punishment than would have been legally ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT