Manning v. State
| Decision Date | 05 April 1966 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 100 |
| Citation | 43 Ala.App. 182,185 So.2d 145 |
| Parties | Leon R. MANNING v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Leon R. Manning, pro se.
Richmond M. Flowers, Atty. Gen., and W. Mark Anderson, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
This appeal is from a denial of coram nobis.
Two separate indictments charging second degree burglary were returned against appellant by a Clarke County Grand Jury on February 19, 1964. On March 17, 1964, he entered guilty pleas as to both indictments and was sentenced to two years on each charge.
The petition is based on appellant's charge that he was illegally arrested; was not allowed to contact an attorney; was not granted a preliminary hearing; was coerced into signing a confession and entering guilty pleas.
It is argued that the warrants of arrest were improperly issued, in that they were signed by the Clerk of the Inferior Court of Clarke County and were executed by the Sheriff of Clarke County by arresting petitioner in Mobile County, without having been indorsed by a magistrate. Section 163, Title 15, Code 1940.
Any irregularities in obtaining jurisdiction of the person may be waived. Henderson v. State, 36 Ala.App. 143, 53 So.2d 624; Gladden v. State, 36 Ala.App. 197, 54 So.2d 607; Bozeman v. State, 40 Ala.App. 391, 114 So.2d 912. They were waived by appellant's actions in this instance. Moreover, there was no showing that any irregularities in his arrest deprived appellant of a fair trial. Brookins v. State (Fla.), 174 So.2d 578.
The failure to have a preliminary hearing did not violate appellant's constitutional rights. Queor v. State, 278 Ala. 10, 174 So.2d 687.
The evidence shows that defendant was free on bond from February 20 to March 17; that he conferred with his Mobile attorney. He was represented by court-appointed counsel at his arraignment and when he entered his pleas of guilty.
The evidence supports the trial judge's conclusion that the confessions and subsequent pleas were voluntary and not the result of coercion, threats, promises or inducements.
The judgment denying coram nobis is affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Daniels v. State
...Ex Parte Flanigan, 278 Ala. 432, 178 So.2d 825, Aldridge v. State, 278 Ala. 470, 179 So.2d 51. To the same effect are Manning v. State, 43 Ala.App. 182, 185 So.2d 145; Coleman v. State, 44 Ala.App. 429, 211 So.2d 917, cert. denied 282 Ala. 725, 211 So.2d 927; Grace v. State, 44 Ala.App. 682......
-
Bowman v. State
...the validity of the indictment and subsequent proceedings incident thereto. Queor v. State, 278 Ala. 10, 174 So.2d 687; Manning v. State, 43 Ala.App. 182, 185 So.2d 145. Code of Alabama, 1940, Tit. 30, Sec. 63, states as 'Whenever any person or persons stand indicted for a capital felony, t......
-
Patterson v. State
...hearing.' See also Queor v. State, 278 Ala. 10, 174 So.2d 687; Aldridge v. State, 278 Ala. 470, 179 So.2d 51; Manning v. State, 43 Ala.App. 182, 185 So.2d 145; Coleman v. State, 44 Ala.App. 429, 211 So.2d 917, certiorari denied, 282 Ala. 725, 211 So.2d Quite frankly, in this instance, under......
-
Core v. State
...in the circuit court. Trammell v. State, 43 Ala.App. 308, 189 So.2d 760; Queor v. State, 278 Ala. 10, 174 So.2d 687; Manning v. State, 43 Ala.App. 182, 185 So.2d 145; Bowman v. State, 44 Ala.App. 331, 208 So.2d At the conclusion of the trial court's oral charge, but before the Jury had reti......