Ippolito v. United States.
Decision Date | 08 March 1943 |
Docket Number | No. 52.,52. |
Parties | IPPOLITO v. UNITED STATES. |
Court | D.C. Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from the Municipal Court for the District of Columbia, Criminal Division.
Anthony T. Ippolito was convicted of violations of the Bad Check Law, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of conviction entered upon pleas of guilty in two cases charging violations of the ‘Bad Check Law’. Following is the complete statement of proceedings and evidence as consented to by defendant and approved by the trial judge:
The statement of errors claimed is general in nature and charges that the trial court committed error (1) in not fully advising defendant in advance as to the consequences of his plea of guilty and (2) in overruling the motion for new trial.
We have carefully studied the case in the light of these assigned errors in order to determine whether defendant's rights have been protected in accordance with the comprehensive rules laid down for the guidance of trial courts in a number of recent cases which we cite in the margin. 1
These things seem plain: that the defendant was represented by counsel at the original arraignment at which he pleaded not guilty and made a demand for trial by jury; that thirteen days later he again appeared in court with his same counsel, withdrew his jury demand and voluntarily changed his plea from not guilty to guilty and was thereupon sentenced; that on the day of his sentence he engaged new counsel (who also represents him here) who filed in his behalf the motion for new trial.
Concerning the first general assignment of error we can find no basis for ruling that there was any invasion of defendant's rights, or any confusion on his part concerning the plea of guilty or its effect. We cannot go beyond the record, 2 and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Com. ex rel. Crosby v. Rundle
...Loeber, 158 Cal.App.2d 730, 323 P.2d 136 (1958), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 132, 79 S.Ct. 242, 3 L.Ed.2d 226 (1958); Ippolito v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 32 A.2d 256 (1943); State v. Cummings, 52 Wash.2d 601, 328 P.2d 160 (1958); United States v. Von Der Heide, D.C., 169 F.Supp. 560 (1959);......
-
Com. ex rel. Crosby v. Rundle
...323 P.2d [415 Pa. 86] 136 (1958), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 132, 79 S.Ct. 242, 3 L.Ed.2d 226 (1958); Ippolito v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 32 A.2d 256 (1943); State v. Cummings, 52 Wash.2d 601, 328 P.2d 160 (1958); United States v. Von Der Heide, D.C., 169 F.Supp. 560 (1959); United States ......
-
Packard v. United States, 966.
...is not in itself enough to require a reversal. 8. McDonnel v. United States, 81 U.S.App. D.C. 123, 155 F.2d 297; Ippolito v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 32 A.2d 256; Carpenter v. District of Columbia, D.C. Mun.App., 32 A.2d ...