Flowers v. State
| Decision Date | 13 September 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 79S00-8612-CR-1020,79S00-8612-CR-1020 |
| Citation | 528 N.E.2d 57 |
| Parties | Clarence FLOWERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Susan K. Carpenter, Public Defender, David P. Freund, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, for appellant.
Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Richard C. Webster, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.
Appellant entered a plea of guilty to Murder and received a sentence of sixty (60) years.
Appellant was charged with the murder of Larry Farrell and an allegation of capital offense was filed against him. Appellant entered a preliminary plea of not guilty. On April 16, 1986, appellant moved to withdraw his not guilty plea and enter a plea of guilty.
During a hearing on the withdrawal of his not guilty plea, appellant was advised of the rights he was relinquishing by pleading guilty and that he was admitting to the facts of the crime. Appellant then testified that on November 26, 1985 he shot Farrell in a Lafayette barber shop because Farrell owed him money. The trial court found that appellant's guilty plea was made knowingly and voluntarily, and the plea was taken under advisement until the sentencing hearing.
At the sentencing hearing, appellant orally moved to withdraw his guilty plea because he recently had become aware of evidence which possibly could exculpate him. The evidence consisted of a telephone bill and an audio tape from a telephone answering machine which allegedly recorded a telephone call made by appellant during the approximate time of the victim's death. Appellant concludes that this evidence could establish that he was in Florida at the time of the shooting. Appellant's counsel learned of this evidence for the first time immediately before the sentencing hearing.
Appellant moved for a continuance so that he could prepare a verified written motion to withdraw his guilty plea in compliance with Ind.Code Sec. 35-35-1-4(b). The trial court denied appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea and his motion for continuance. The court found that appellant had knowingly and voluntarily pled guilty and the court accepted his guilty plea. Appellant's trial counsel then moved to withdraw from the case, and his motion was denied.
Appellant first argues the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. He asserts that because his trial counsel needed time to determine the probative value of the evidence which could establish that he was in Florida on the date of the murder, the denial of his motion was error.
Indiana Code Sec. 35-35-1-4(b) states that after entry of a plea of guilty but before imposition of a sentence, the court may allow the defendant, by motion, to withdraw his plea of guilty, for any fair and just reason unless the State will be substantially prejudiced. The motion to withdraw the plea of guilty made under this subsection shall be in writing and verified. The ruling of the court on the motion shall be reviewable on appeal only for an abuse of discretion. The court shall allow the defendant to withdraw his plea of guilty whenever the defendant proves that withdrawal of the plea is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.
Where a trial court overrules a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, on appeal this Court will indulge a presumption in favor of the trial court's ruling. We will not disturb the trial court's ruling where such ruling was based on conflicting evidence. It is only where the trial court has abused its discretion in denying appellant's motion to withdraw a plea of guilty that this Court will reverse such determination. Centers v. State (1986), Ind., 501 N.E.2d 415.
Because appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea was not in writing or verified, he has waived the issue....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Flowers v. Hanks
... ... ALLEN SHARP, Chief Judge ... On June 26, 1996, petitioner, Clarence Flowers ("Flowers"), filed the present petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in this court, challenging a 1986 conviction for murder imposed by the State of Indiana. Flowers is currently incarcerated at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility in Carlisle, Indiana, and has filed his petition pro se ... I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ... On January 3, 1986, Flowers was charged by information in the Tippecanoe County Circuit ... ...
-
Marshall v. Farley, 93-3399
... ... In October 1989, the state trial court modified Marshall's sentence, vacating five of the six convictions (counts 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11) for operating a motor vehicle with a BAC ... IND.CODE Sec. 35-35-1-4(c) (1993). 6 If the motion to withdraw a guilty plea is not in writing and verified the issue is waived. Flowers v. State, 528 N.E.2d 57, 59 (Ind.1988); Smith v. State, 593 N.E.2d 1208, 1209 (Ind.Ct.App.1993), trans. denied ... When a state ... ...
-
Hunter v. State
... ... Like sentencing, whether or not to allow a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea is within the sound discretion of the trial court. Trueblood v. State, 587 N.E.2d 105 (Ind.1992); Flowers v. State, 528 N.E.2d 57 (Ind.1988). The trial court may refuse to allow a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea if the defendant fails to show it would result in manifest injustice. Flowers, 528 N.E.2d 57; Ind.Code § 35-35-1-4(b). The ruling of the court is reviewable only for abuse of ... ...
-
Coleman v. State
... ... The trial court informed appellant that if he wished to employ private counsel he might do so; the court indicated, however, that the trial would proceed as scheduled. Such was the prerogative of the trial court. Flowers v. State (1988), Ind., 528 N.E.2d 57. We see nothing in this episode which would indicate in any way that trial counsel was ineffective in his representation ... Appellant also contends his trial counsel was ineffective because he did not object to the use of the victim's ... ...