Gearhart v. People, 15509.
| Decision Date | 04 December 1944 |
| Docket Number | 15509. |
| Citation | 113 Colo. 9,154 P.2d 47 |
| Parties | GEARHART v. PEOPLE. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Error to District Court, City and County of Denver; Joseph E. Cook Judge.
Charles W. Gearhart was convicted of grand larceny, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
O. Otto Moore, of Denver, for plaintiff in error.
Gail L Ireland, Atty. Gen., H. Lawrence Hinkley, Deputy Atty. Gen and James S. Henderson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
A motion for permission to withdraw a plea of guilty on a charge of felony, previously made, was denied.
It appears that January 10, 1944, a criminal information containing two counts was filed in the district court, the first count charging defendant with grand larceny, the second, with buying and receiving the property mentioned in the first count, knowing the same to have been stolen; that January 12, 1944, defendant appeared personally and by counsel, and, being arraigned, pleaded not guilty; that February 2, 1944, defendant, accompanied by his counsel again appeared and withdrew his plea of not guilty generally, and, upon rearraignment, pleaded guilty to the first count of the information, and, after the court had explained the effects and consequences of that plea, persisted therein; that thereupon 'certain evidence is adduced to corroborate said plea'; that February 25, 1944, defendant, attended by different counsel, came into court, and by verified motion asked that his 'plea of guilty heretofore entered * * * be vacated and set aside, and that a plea of not guilty * * * be entered;' that February 26, 1944, the court, after hearing argument of counsel, denied said motion, following which, sentence, conformably to applicable statutory provisions, was imposed.
Whether in furtherance of a defendant's immediate desire to plead not guilty, he may withdraw a plea of guilty, previously entered, 'is within the sound discretion of the trial court.' 16 C.J., p. 396, § 728 22 C.J.S., Criminal Law, § 421, approvingly quoted in Abshier v. People, 87 Colo. 507, 524, 289 P. 1081, 1088. The discretion thus reposed in the court 'should be exercised liberally in favor of life and liberty,' but 'where it is plain that substantial justice will not be promoted, or the substantial rights of defendant prejudiced, the application for leave to withdraw the plea should be denied.' Abshier v. People, and 16 C.J., p. 396, § 728, 22 C.J.S.,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bradley v. People
...McIntosh v. City and County of Denver, 144 Colo. 59, 355 P.2d 97; Hawkins v. The People, 131 Colo. 281, 281 P.2d 156; Gearhart v. People, 113 Colo. 9, 154 P.2d 47.' Our review of the hearings on February 14 and March 20 indicates no abuse of discretion by the trial court in denying the moti......
-
Gallegos v. People
...and in the absence of a showing of an abuse of discretion by the trial court, this court will not disturb its ruling. Gearhart v. People, 113 Colo. 9, 154 P.2d 47 and Abshier v. People, 87 Colo. 507, 289 P. As we view the record before us, we are inescapably drawn toward the conclusion that......
-
Perez v. People
...and in the absence of a showing of an abuse of discretion by the trial court, this court will not disturb its ruling. Gearhart v. People, 113 Colo. 9, 154 P.2d 47 and Abshier v. People, 87 Colo. 507, 289 P. The proceedings in the trial court relative to this matter do not demonstrate a clea......
-
Lucero v. People
...McIntosh v. City and County of Denver, 144 Colo. 59, 355 P.2d 97; Hawkins v. People, 131 Colo. 281, 281 P.2d 156; Gearhart v. People, 113 Colo. 9, 154 P.2d 47. Another facet of this issue raised by the defendant is that the court erred when, in the 35(b) proceeding, it found that the defend......