Franklin v. State, 29271
| Decision Date | 27 May 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 29271,29271 |
| Citation | 126 N.E.2d 768,234 Ind. 418 |
| Parties | Shelby FRANKLIN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
James Shelby Franklin, Jr., pro se.
Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Richard M. Given, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Shelby Franklin, Jr., a resident of Wayne County, was apprehended in the state of Tennessee in March, 1954. He was brought back to Wayne County and there tried and convicted of vehicle taking following a jury trial on September 30, 1954.
He, pro se., has filed a transcript and an assignment of errors with purported 'Appellant's Brief' in this appeal. The state has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the appeal has failed to comply with Rule 2-17 of the Rules of this court in the preparation of his brief.
An examination of 'Appellant's Brief' leaves no doubt that the motion should be sustained. The brief is a rambling discussion of appellant's contentions which show nothing more than his lack of comprehension of the legal points involved. It is of no help to the court.
The court has, however, examined the transcript and it appears the defendant has had a fair trial. The record shows he has had legal counsel at various times before, during the trial, and apparently in the preparation of the transcript filed. The record shows the trial court tendered and furnished the defendant with counsel during trial. The defendant, nevertheless, rejected this counsel, refused to cooperate with him and refused to permit any of his witnesses to testify in his defense although they were available. Counsel, however, cross-examined the state's witnesses.
The appellant complains of the shortness of time to prepare for trial. The record shows that he was notified by letter in July of the setting of the case for trial on September 29, 1954. The appellant on September 17, 1954 wrote the trial Judge that 'any action you take in the above entitled cause will not be recognized in the trial * * *.'
If a party sees fit to appear pro se. and attempts to represent himself before a court when he has ample opportunity to secure competent counsel and to receive legal advice, such person must take the consequences of his own deliberate acts.
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wallace v. State
...of his own deliberate act and is presumed to accept the burden and hazards incident to his position. See, Franklin v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 418, 126 N.E.2d 768; Blanton v. State (1951), 229 Ind. 701, 98 N.E.2d "Here the appellant was advised on several occasions that he had the right to be......
-
Yager v. State
...and hazards incident to his position." Blanton v. State, (1951) 229 Ind. 701, 703, 98 N.E.2d 186, 187. See also, Franklin v. State, (1955) 234 Ind. 418, 126 N.E.2d 768. One of the "burdens and hazards" appellant took on by rejecting the offer to have counsel appointed for him was that of do......
-
Haynes v. State
...of his own deliberate act and is presumed to accept the burden and hazards incident to his position. See, Franklin v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 418, 126 N.E.2d 768; Blanton v. State (1951), 229 Ind. 701, 98 N.E.2d Here the appellant was advised on several occasions that he had the right to be ......
-
Placencia v. State
...of his own deliberate act and is presumed to accept the burden and hazards incident to his position. See, Franklin v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 418, 126 N.E.2d 768; Blanton v. State (1951), 229 Ind. 701, 98 N.E.2d Here the appellant was advised on several occasions that he had the right to be ......