Henry v. State, 49S028611PC955
Decision Date | 07 November 1986 |
Docket Number | No. 49S028611PC955,49S028611PC955 |
Citation | 499 N.E.2d 1074 |
Parties | Norman E. HENRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. |
Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Susan K. Carpenter, Public Defender, Jo Ann Farnsworth, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, for appellant.
Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Theodore E. Hansen, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.
Petitioner-Appellant Norman E. Henry entered a guilty plea to arson, a class B felony, and was sentenced to six years imprisonment on August 19, 1983. He subsequently filed a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, which was denied. The Fourth District Court of Appeals reversed, 486 N.E.2d 666, holding the trial court did not inform Henry of the possibility of an increased sentence due to a prior conviction. The State now seeks to transfer the case to this Court because: 1) the trial court substantially complied with the statutory requirements for guilty pleas; and 2) if they failed to do so, any error was harmless.
At the guilty plea hearing the following conversation took place:
The trial court proceeded to accept the guilty plea and sentenced Henry to the least possible sentence for a class B felony, six (6) years. The Fourth District Court of Appeals reversed, holding the trial court did not inform Henry of the possibility of an increased sentence due to a prior conviction. The court further held the error was not harmless.
This is just the type of situation envisioned in White v. State (1986), Ind., 497 N.E.2d 893, where we held:
Id. at 905. As in White, Henry does not allege any specific facts which would suggest that his decision was the result of coercion or having been misled. Since he was sentenced to the least possible term, he cannot allege to have been harmed by any error the trial court might have made in advising of the possibility of an increased sentence.
Transfer is granted, the opinion of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the trial court is affirmed.
The plea of guilty was given and accepted on August 19, 1983, after the effective date in December, 1981, of the rule announced in German v. State (1981), Ind., 428 N.E.2d 234, requiring strict compliance by the trial courts of the state with the provisions of the guilty plea statute then existing, which statutory provisions were declared required by due process of law clauses in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Jackson v. State
... ... Henry v. State ... (1986), Ind., 499 N.E.2d 1074. Accord, Willis v. State (1986), Ind.App., 498 N.E.2d 1029. Because he was sentenced to the least ... ...
-
Patton v. State
...Patton cannot show that he was harmed by the court's failure to advise him regarding sentencing possibilities. See Henry v. State (1986) Ind., 499 N.E.2d 1074, 1075 in which the majority "As in White, Henry does not allege any specific facts which would suggest that his decision was the res......
-
Love v. State
...retroactively. We note, however, that the Indiana Supreme Court has applied White retroactively in several cases. E.g., Henry v. State (1986), Ind., 499 N.E.2d 1074, 1075; King v. State (1986), Ind., 499 N.E.2d 241, 242. Love claims he was prejudiced by the court's failure to give the advis......