State ex rel. Johnson v. Boles
| Decision Date | 22 November 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 12596,12596 |
| Citation | 151 W.Va. 224,151 S.E.2d 213 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. Nathan JOHNSON v. Otto C. BOLES, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. 'The denial of the fundamental right of a defendant to the assistance of counsel in a criminal proceeding applies to and invalidates any prior conviction of an offense within the meaning of a recidivist statute, and such conviction and any sentence of imprisonment imposed upon it, being null and void because of such denial, can not justify or support the imposition of any additional imprisonment under such statute.' Point 2, syllabus, State ex rel. Widmyer v. Boles, 150 W.Va. 109 (144 S.E.2d 322).
2. A petitioner in a habeas corpus proceeding, upon whom imprisonment for an invalid additional period has been improperly imposed under the recidivist statute of this State, may be relieved of the void portion of the imprisonment but will not be discharged from serving the maximum term provided by statute for the principal offense and any valid additional sentence for any prior felony conviction.
Sterl F. Shinaberry, Welch, for relator.
C. Donald Robertson, Atty. Gen., George H. Mitchell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, for respondent.
In this original habeas corpus proceeding instituted in this Court in July 1966, the petitioner, Nathan Johnson, who is presently confined in the penitentiary of this State by virtue of a sentence of life imprisonment as a habitual criminal imposed by the Criminal Court of McDowell County, West Virginia, by its final judgment rendered May 13, 1954, seeks a writ to prevent the enforcement of the sentence of life imprisonment and to require the defendant, Otto C. Boles, Warden of the West Virginia Penitentiary, to release him from such confinement.
On July 26, 1966, this Court awarded a writ returnable October 4, 1966 and appointed an attorney to represent the petitioner. Upon the return day of the writ this proceeding, by agreement of the parties and consent of this Court, was continued until October 18, 1966, at which time it was heard and submitted for decision upon the petition and its exhibits, the return of the defendant, and the written brief in behalf of the petitioner. The case was not argued orally and no brief was filed in behalf of the defendant.
From the pleadings and the exhibits it appears that the petitioner was indicted by the grand jury of the Criminal Court of McDowell County at the April 1954 Term for the crime of murder; that on the 30th day of April, 1954, the petitioner, being represented by counsel, upon his plea of not guilty, was convicted by the verdict of a jury of the crime of murder of the second degree; that on May 13, 1954, during the same term of court, the motion of the petitioner to set aside the verdict of the jury and to grant him a new trial was overruled; that on that day the prosecuting attorney of McDowell County filed an information which charged that in addition to the conviction of the principal offense of murder of the second degree the petitioner had been twice previously convicted of and sentenced for felonies in the Criminal Court of McDowell County on November 10, 1941, and January 18, 1950; that after being duly cautioned the petitioner acknowledged that he was the same person who had been twice previously convicted and sentenced for the foregoing felonies; and that by final judgment rendered May 13, 1954, the petitioner was sentenced to confinement in the penitentiary of this State for the term of his natural life as a recidivist.
The order entered November 10, 1941, sentencing the petitioner to confinement in the penitentiary for an indeterminate period of one year to five years is silent with respect to the appointment or the presence of counsel for the petitioner and as to whether he was advised as to his right to the assistance of counsel and whether he intelligently waived such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Reedy, s. 17019 and 17020
... ... Pt. 1, State ex rel. May v. Boles, 149 W.Va. 155, 139 S.E.2d 177 (1964) ... 2. "A trial court lacks ... United States, 315 U.S. 60, 70, 62 S.Ct. 457, 464, 86 L.Ed. 680, 699 (1942); Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938). If disclosure is not made, the ... ...
-
Wanstreet v. Bordenkircher
... ... held to require a strict construction in favor of the prisoner." State ex rel. Ringer v. Boles, 151 W.Va. 864, 871, 157 S.E.2d 554, 558 (1967) ... State ex rel. Johnson v. Boles, 151 W.Va. 224, 151 S.E.2d 213 (1966); State ex rel. Widmyer v ... ...
-
Cuppett v. Duckworth
...found no less than 40 pre-Gideon convictions and enhanced sentences violated the defendants' right to counsel. State ex rel. Johnson v. Boles, 151 S.E.2d 213 (1966); State ex rel. Ponton v. Boles, 150 S.E.2d 339 (1966); State ex rel. Wright v. Boles, 146 S.E.2d 524 (1966); State ex rel. Wid......
-
State v. Cain
... ... State ex rel. Beckett v. Boles, 149 W.Va. 112, 118, 138 S.E.2d 851, 855 (1964), and cases cited therein; see ... Syl. pt. 1, State ex rel. Johnson v. Boles, 151 W.Va. 224, 151 S.E.2d 213 (1966); syl. pt. 2, State ex rel. Widmyer v. Boles, 150 ... ...