State ex rel. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court, No. 172S12
| Docket Nº | No. 172S12 |
| Citation | 258 Ind. 354, 281 N.E.2d 106 |
| Case Date | April 18, 1972 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Page 106
v.
The LaGRANGE CIRCUIT COURT, Jack P. Dunten, Judge of the
LaGrange Circuit Court, Respondents.
[258 Ind. 355] Howard E. Petersen, LaGrange, for relator.
Edward A. Chapleau, South Bend, for respondents.
GIVAN, Justice.
This is an original action filed by the relator asking this Court to issue a writ of mandate to the respondent court ordering the court to strike an order book entry to the effect that relator had waived his right to an appeal. Relator further asks that the trial court be mandated to grant an extension of time and the appointment of pauper counsel to perfect his appeal. This Court previously refused to grant the relief prayed by the relator.
The relator was tried in the respondent court on the charge of first degree murder. Jury trial resulted a verdict of guilty on
Page 107
June 3, 1971. After being sentenced to the Indiana State Prison for life, the relator informed the respondent court that he desired to file a motion to correct errors. Sometime shortly after he had been sentenced, the relator escaped from the LaGrange County Jail and remained a fugitive from justice until September 27, 1971, when after having been captured he was brought back into the jurisdiction of the respondent court. During the time he was a fugitive, namely: on August 2, 1971, relator's attorney filed a motion to correct errors. This motion was overruled by the trial court on the ground that during the period in which the motion to correct errors could be filed under the rules of this Court the relator had escaped and absented himself from the jurisdiction of the court. On November 22, 1971, relator filed a motion to set aside the ruling or in the alternative to modify it. This motion was overruled by the respondent court.[258 Ind. 356] It is relator's contention that he has a right to an appeal, which right cannot be waived. With this we do not agree. The right to appeal may certainly be waived and in many cases in fact those convicted do specifically waive their right to an appeal. In the case before us it is true the relator specifically stated immediately following his conviction that he desired to file a motion to correct errors, thus indicating to the trial court that he desired to take the preliminary steps required for the taking of an appeal. However, almost immediately after so informing the trial court the relator deliberately and unlawfully absented himself from the court's jurisdiction. This question was handled by this Court in the case of Irvin v. State (1956), 236 Ind. 384, at page 391, 139 N.E.2d 898, at page 901 this Court stated:
'Most of the cases on the question which we have examined, base their decisions on waiver or estoppel.
'They deal with situations where the appellant and defendant were still at large pending an appeal which apparently had been perfected, and errors properly assigned while he was still in custody. But be this as it may, the principle is the same whether the cause is pending on appeal or in the trial court during the absence of the defendant as a fugitive from its custody. If a prisoner escapes he is not entitled during the period he is a fugitive to any standing in court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ruetz v. State, No. 175S22
...by numerous difficulties, including the accidental loss of most of the record of the trial. Cf. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court (1972), 258 Ind. 354, 281 N.E.2d 106; Ruetz v. Lash (7th Cir. 1974), 500 F.2d 1225. The crime in question is the murder of Thomas Schultz, the owner of a South Ben......
-
Ruetz v. Lash, No. 73-1803
...appellant 'walked away from the LaGrange County Jail through an open garage door.' State ex rel. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court, 281 N.E.2d 106, 108 (Ind.1972). He was apprehended and returned to LaGrange County more than three months later, on September 27, 1971. In the meantime, his lawy......
-
Skolnick v. State, No. 3-1076A233
...conduct could hardly be farther removed from the rule in Soft Water Utilities. In State ex rel. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court (1972), 258 Ind. 354, 281 N.E.2d 106, our Supreme Court directly addressed the problem of a defendant who attempts to file a pleading while absenting himself from ......
-
Cornell v. State, No. 2-179A9
...a 'public place or a place of public resort' within the meaning of (the public intoxication statute)." 258 Ind. at 340, 281 N.E.2d at 106. In support of this conclusion the court A gasoline service station was held to be a public place within the ambit of a similar statute in State v. ......
-
Ruetz v. State, No. 175S22
...by numerous difficulties, including the accidental loss of most of the record of the trial. Cf. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court (1972), 258 Ind. 354, 281 N.E.2d 106; Ruetz v. Lash (7th Cir. 1974), 500 F.2d 1225. The crime in question is the murder of Thomas Schultz, the owner of a South Ben......
-
Ruetz v. Lash, No. 73-1803
...appellant 'walked away from the LaGrange County Jail through an open garage door.' State ex rel. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court, 281 N.E.2d 106, 108 (Ind.1972). He was apprehended and returned to LaGrange County more than three months later, on September 27, 1971. In the meantime, his lawy......
-
Skolnick v. State, No. 3-1076A233
...conduct could hardly be farther removed from the rule in Soft Water Utilities. In State ex rel. Ruetz v. LaGrange Circuit Court (1972), 258 Ind. 354, 281 N.E.2d 106, our Supreme Court directly addressed the problem of a defendant who attempts to file a pleading while absenting himself from ......
-
Cornell v. State, No. 2-179A9
...a 'public place or a place of public resort' within the meaning of (the public intoxication statute)." 258 Ind. at 340, 281 N.E.2d at 106. In support of this conclusion the court A gasoline service station was held to be a public place within the ambit of a similar statute in State v. ......