Miles v. State
| Decision Date | 20 July 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. A--13732,A--13732 |
| Citation | 416 P.2d 964 |
| Parties | Alfred C. MILES, Plaintiff in Error, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court
1. A defendant has a right to enter a plea of guilty at any time during the progress of the trial, and may waive, not only statutory rights, but certain constitutional rights.
2. An accused, charged with burglary of coin operated machine after former conviction of felony, who is represented by counsel at every stage of his trial, and after verdict of guilty has been returned by the jury on the first phase of his trial, may enter a plea of guilty to both charges.
3. Where an accused pleads to merits of criminal action, he waives all objections to legality of his arrest.
4. Where defendant entered plea of guilty to charge of burglary, after former conviction of felony, he waived any variance between allegations of the information and the proof.
5. An assignment of error that there was a fatal variance between the allegations of information and proof, not urged in the court below, and not a ground for reversal presented in petition in error, need not be considered.
6. Evidence supported conviction of defendant for burglary of coin operated parking meter.
Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County; S. J. Clendinning, Judge.
Alfred C. Miles was convicted of the crime of burglary of a coin operated parking meter, after former conviction of felony, and appeals. Affirmed.
Gary W. Sibley, Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.
Charles Nesbitt, Atty. Gen., Charles L. Owens, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
Alfred C. Miles, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, was charged by information filed February 12, 1965 in the district court of Tulsa County with the crime of burglary of a coin operated machine, after former conviction of a felony.
It was charged that on January 6, 1965 defendant, in the night time, and while acting in concert with Eugene Ennis, broke open a certain coin operated parking meter in the city of Tulsa.
The State introduced the testimony of two police officers; the traffic control maintenance foreman and the collector with the traffic engineering department, who had charge of the parking meters in Tulsa. The defendant did not offer any evidence.
This case was tried to a jury, which on Friday afternoon returned a verdict of guilty as charged in the information. The court informed the jury that they had not finished the case, and after giving proper admonitions to the jury, dismissed them until Monday morning.
On Monday morning the court was prepared to submit the second phase of the charge. At that time the defendant and his counsel announced that defendant would enter a plea of guilty to the charge of burglary of a coin operated machine, and to the former conviction charge.
After some discussion concerning the sentence to be rendered, and the recommendation of the county attorney, defendant and his attorney waived time for pronouncing sentence. The court then sentenced defendant to serve four years in the State Penitentiary.
Counsel gave notice of intention to appeal, and appeal bond was fixed. The motion for new trial was overruled, and defendant was sentenced on April 12, 1965. The appeal was thereafter filed in this Court.
Counsel in his brief assigns three errors, as follows:
We have carefully read and considered the record in this case, as well as the briefs filed, and are of the opinion that there is no merit in any of the assignments...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cannon v. State
...whole argument is irrelevant to the issue of whether the warrant was valid.4 Fischer v. State, 483 P.2d 1162 (Okl.Cr.1971); Miles v. State, 416 P.2d 964 (Okl.Cr.1966).5 Thigpen v. State, 462 P.2d 270 (Okl.Cr.1969) (defendant objected when illegal search was first used to support evidence).6......
-
Smith v. State, F-78-331
...without objection, thereby waiving his right to object to an unlawful arrest. Stone v. State, 461 P.2d 962 (Okl.Cr.1969); Miles v. State, 416 P.2d 964 (Okl.Cr.1966). The appellant argues that his plea prior to objecting to the legality of his arrest should not be used to deny his right to p......
-
Darks v. State
...275 (1993); Holliday v. State, 755 P.2d 124, 126 (Okl.Cr.1988); Carter v. State, 738 P.2d 562, 563 (Okl.Cr.1987); Miles v. State, 416 P.2d 964, 965 (Okl.Cr.1966). Accordingly, this subproposition of error is ¶14 In his second subproposition, Appellant claims that Exhibits 57 and 58 should h......
-
Maghe v. State, A--14011
...to a preliminary examination, or if one was held, any irregularity therein.' See, also, Rapp v. State, Okl.Cr., 413 P.2d 915; Miles v. State, Okl.Cr., 416 P.2d 964. This Court also recited in the matter of In re Dare, Okl.Cr., 370 P.2d 'A defendant in a criminal case may waive any right not......