State ex rel. Adams v. Norvell
| Decision Date | 25 September 1969 |
| Citation | 1 Tenn.Crim.App. 648,448 S.W.2d 454 |
| Parties | STATE of Tennessee ex rel. Charles Leonard ADAMS, Petitioner, v. J. W. NORVELL, Warden, Respondent. |
| Court | Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals |
W. J. Michael Cody, Memphis, for petitioner.
George F. McCanless, Atty. Gen., Robert H. Roberts, Asst. Atty. Gen., Nashville, Billy F. Gray, Asst. Dist. Atty. Gen., Memphis, for respondent.
In his petition for habeas corpus, the petitioner below, Charles Leonard Adams, says that his conviction and sentence to ten years' imprisonment on his plea of guilty to robbery with a deadly weapon was void because no evidence was presented to the jury under T.C.A. Sec. 40--2310. His appointed counsel amended the petition to charge also that he was required to waive his right to appeal as a condition of being able to enter a plea of guilty.
At the hearing both sides relied on the transcript of the proceedings when the guilty plea was entered and the petitioner sentenced. After fully considering the questions presented, the trial judge dismissed the petition.
The petitioner and a codefendant were jointly indicted for robbery with a deadly weapon and were represented by members of the public defender's staff. On February 22, 1967, the petitioner filed a petition for waiver of trial by a jury on the merits and request for acceptance of a plea of guilty. His petition also says that he waives any right he may have to a motion for a new trial and appeal. It also shows that he had been advised by his attorney as to the range of the punishment for the charge contained in the indictment.
Before accepting the plea of guilty, the trial judge addressed the petitioner personally to determine that he understood the nature of the charge; that his plea of guilty was freely and voluntarily made; that by it he waived his right to a trial by the jury on the merits of the indictment; the maximum possible sentence as well as the minimum. The court conducted a detailed inquiry to determine the accuracy of the guilty plea. The petitioner told the court that he did not want a new trial or to appeal.
The assistant district attorney general explained the facts of the case to the jury and the agreement reached between the state and the petitioner through his counsel to recommend punishment of ten years in the penitentiary. Petitioner's attorney joined in the recommendation and asked the jury to approve the sentence. The jury fixed punishment at ten years' imprisonment in accordance with the recommendation by the state and the petitioner through his counsel.
The right to have a jury impaneled to hear the evidence and fix the punishment on a plea of guilty is a statutory one and may be waived. It is solely a creature of the statute and does not rise to constitutional stature. See State ex rel. Edmondson v. Henderson, 220 Tenn. 605, 421 S.W.2d 635; State ex rel. Ingram v. Henderson, 220 Tenn. 676, 423 S.W.2d 479; State ex rel. Barnes v. Henderson, 220...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Charles
...1176; State v. McKinney (La.1981) 406 So.2d 160; People v. Jimenez (1983) 97 A.D.2d 799, 468 N.Y.S.2d 421; State ex rel. Adams v. Norvell (1969) 1 Tenn.Cr.App. 648, 448 S.W.2d 454.) The principles set out above are buttressed by the Uniform Rules of Criminal Procedure (approved 1974) as wel......
-
People v. Vargas
...(1991) 192 Mich.App. 1 ; People v. Seaberg (1989) 74 N.Y.2d 1, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968, 541 N.E.2d 1022, 1024-1026; State ex rel. Adams v. Norvell (1969) 1 Tenn.Crim.App. 648 ; State v. Perkins (1987) 108 Wash.2d 212 .) Only a few jurisdictions have taken a different view. (See, e.g., State v. Eth......
-
Cubbage v. State
...possibility of a less severe minimum sentence. And see Reeder v. State, 556 S.W.2d 485 (Mo.App.1977) and State ex rel. Adams v. Norvell, 1 Tenn.Crim.App. 648, 448 S.W.2d 454 (1969). Also relevant is a series of New York cases dealing with waivers of appeal adjunct to bargained for guilty pl......
-
People v. Vargas
...287; People v. Seaberg (N.Y.1989) 74 N.Y.2d 1, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968, 970-972, 541 N.E.2d 1022, 1024-1026; State ex rel. Adams v. Norvell (1969) 1 Tenn.Crim.App. 648, 448 S.W.2d 454; State v. Perkins (1987) 108 Wash.2d 212, 737 P.2d 250; contra, State v. Ethington (1979) 121 Ariz. 572, 592 P.2d ......