Sells v. State
| Decision Date | 08 August 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 28907,28907 |
| Parties | SELLS v. STATE. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
T. Ernest Maholm, Indianapolis, for appellant.
J. Emmett McManamon, Atty. Gen., John Ready O'Connor and William T. McClain, Deputy Attys. Gen., for appellee.
This is an appeal from an order and judgment denying appellant's petition for a writ of error coram nobis.
Appellant was arrested on the evening of February 23, 1949, and on February 28, 1949, was indicted for first degree murder. On March 1, 1949, appellant appeared in person and by attorney before the trial court, was arraigned, and, after being advised of his rights, in compliance with Rule 1-11 of this court, entered a plea of guilty. Judgment and sentence to life imprisonment followed. On December 3, 1951, appellant filed his verified petition for a writ of error coram nobis. On January 9, 1952, appellee filed its answer under Rule 1-3 of this court. On January 31, 1952, the attorney for appellant appeared before the trial court. He had not requested that appellant be present in person, and, on being advised by the trial court that a continuance would be granted if the attorney for appellant wished appellant to be present, declined the offer of the trial court, and stated that he was ready to proceed. A hearing was held, evidence was introduced, and on March 12, 1952, the trial court denied appellant's petition. On March 17, 1952, judgment was entered denying the petition for a writ of error coram nobis.
Appellant's first assignment of error is the only one properly before this court under our Rule 2-40.
Appellant contends in his petition for a writ of error coram nobis that his constitutional rights under Article 1, Section 13, of the State of Indiana, and under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, were violated in that counsel was denied him at each stage of the proceedings, that he was held ten days before being taken before a magistrate, that he was taken from the Henry County Jail to a State Police Barracks without order or authority of a court, was taken before the Prosecutor of Henry County without counsel, and refused counsel, and, after having been without sleep for more than thirty-six hours, was threatened and coerced into making a confession, and was threatened with a 'hot seat' if he did not plead guilty. The petition further alleged, in substance, that the attorney appointed by the court for appellant did not have time to prepare, consult, and properly advise appellant. Appellant, in support of his petition, introduced into evidence his verified petition for a writ of error coram nobis, along with the bench warrant, and rested his case.
Appellee introduced evidence controverting each allegation of appellant's petition.
In appellant's Exhibit 1, introduced before the trial court, were the proceedings of the court as required by this court's Rule No. 1-11, which are as follows:
'The defendant Ernest Sells, being arraigned, the following proceedings were had:
'Questioned by the Court:
* * *
'(The indictment was read by the Court to the defendant.)
'Questioned by Mr. Benson:
I'll ask you to look at that and directing your attention to the name on the last page, Ernest R. Sells, is that your signature? A. Yes.
'Q. And you signed this confession after it had been read to you and you understood the contents of it? A. Yes.
'Q. And what is stated in this confession is true? A. Yes.
'The Court:
'Q. What is your age? A. Thirty-nine.
'The Court: On your plea of guilty to this charge, I will sentence you to the Indiana State Prison for life.
'(signed) John H. Morris,
'Judge Henry Circuit Court
'State of Indiana, Henry County, SS:
'I, Robert A. Harvey, Clerk of Henry Circuit Court within and for said County and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hillman v. State
...in order to maintain his petition. State v. Lindsey (State v. Carroll), 1952, 231 Ind. 126, 136, 106 N.E.2d 230; Sells v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 137, 142, 107 N.E.2d 264; Souerdike v. State, 1952, 231 Ind. 204, 206, 108 N.E.2d He failed to sustain that burden. Second: If the evidence was suc......
-
Penn v. State
...of error coram nobis; therefore, the judgment must be affirmed. Grecu v. State (1956), 235 Ind. 234, 131 N.E.2d 646; Sells v. State (1952), 231 Ind. 137, 107 N.E.2d 264. Also a copy of this opinion is ordered mailed to the warden of the Indiana State Prison for consideration by him as to im......
-
State v. Gurecki, 30836
...v. State (1953), 232 Ind. 695, 116 N.E.2d 98; State v. Lindsey; State v. Carroll (1952) 231 Ind. 126, 106 N.E.2d 230; Sells v. State (1952), 231 Ind. 137, 107 N.E.2d 264. It is argued that 'it is an undue hardship to place the burden on the petitioner' in coram nobis proceedings. On the oth......
-
Kennedy v. State, 28910
... ... Garrett v. State, 1939, 216 Ind. 52, 22 N.E.2d 981. The presumption is that the judgment of conviction, which was valid on its face, was procured by due course of law. Sells v. State, Ind.Sup.1952, 107 N.E.2d 264; State v. Lindsey, Ind.Sup.1952, 106 N.E.2d 230. The burden is on the appellant to prove by fair preponderance of the evidence that he was denied his legal or constitutional rights. Thompson v. State, 1947, 225 Ind. 78, 72 N.E.2d 744; Sells v. State, ... ...