State ex rel. Sanders v. Reeves, 28671
| Decision Date | 05 May 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 28671,28671 |
| Citation | 228 Ind. 293,91 N.E.2d 912 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. SANDERS v. REEVES, Judge. |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Wilbur Sanders, per se.
Ollie C. Reeves, Evansville, for appellee.
This is an original action for an alternative writ of mandamus to compel the respondent to accept jurisdiction, hear and determine petitioner's petition for writ of error coram nobis, or show cause why the same should not be done.
The petitioner, who is a prisoner in the Indiana State Prison, alleges his petition was prepared without the aid of counsel, which fact is all too apparent from a brief examination thereof. We have often noticed the failure of pauper prisoners to avail themselves of the advice and skilled services of the Public Defender, both in the trial courts and here. If prisoners would stop trying to initiate and prosecute proceedings for a review of their judgments, without the advice and help of the Public Defender, he would have more time to devote to those who may have some merit to their claims, and the trial courts as well as this court would avoid the loss of time involved in considering such cases. The office of Public Defender was created for the benefit of those wrongfully imprisoned, as well as to aid the courts in administering justice, but when a prisoner elects to represent himself, there is no reason for this court to indulge any benevolent presumption in his behalf, or waive any rule for the orderly and proper conduct of litigation and appeals.
Petitioner alleges he filed his petition for a writ of error coram nobis in the Vanderburgh Circuit Court, and that such court, on January 28, 1950, denied the same 'for lack of jurisdiction.' We are not in a position to decide whether this ruling was correct, for we cannot consider the allegation as true, since there are no 'certified copies of all pleadings, orders and entries pertaining to the subject matter' included in or attached as exhibits to the petition, as required by Rule 2-35 of this court. For this defect the petition here is insufficient. Lester v. Grant Circuit Court, 1948, 226 Inc. --, 78 N.E.2d 785. Nor does his petition here allege that the Attorney General was ever served with notice of the petition in the trial court as required by § 49-1937, Burns 1933 (Supplement). Until such notice is served the petitioner has no action commenced in the trial court. White v. Marion Criminal Court, Div. 1, Ind.Sup.1949, 84 N.E.2d 588.
The petition is denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Owen v. State
...81 N.E.2d 784, and at the appellate level, See, e. g., Fender v. Lash, (1973) 261 Ind. 373, 304 N.E.2d 209, And State ex rel. Sanders v. Reeves, (1950) 228 Ind. 293, 91 N.E.2d 912. While we have customarily heard pro se appeals, there are many reasons why we exercise great discretion in doi......
-
State ex rel. Medical Licensing Bd. of Indiana v. Stetina, 2-1084A297
...rules of procedure that trained legal counsel is bound to follow. Owen, at 518, 381 N.E.2d at 1239, quoting State ex rel. Sanders v. Reeves (1950), 228 Ind. 293, 91 N.E.2d 912; Smith v. State (1977), 267 Ind. 167, 174, 368 N.E.2d 1154, 1158; Craig v. State (1980), Ind.App., 403 N.E.2d 925, ......
-
White v. Washington County Circuit Court, 0-425
...Court, 1950, 229 Ind. 77, 95 N.E.2d 631; State ex rel. Spires v. Bottorff, 1949, 227 Ind. 229, 84 N.E.2d 882; State ex rel. Sanders v. Reeves, 1950, 228 Ind. 293, 91 N.E.2d 912; State ex rel. Parlow v. Baker, 1950, 228 Ind. 495, 93 N.E.2d 199. The petition for writ of mandamus is further de......
-
State ex rel. Powers v. Vigo Circuit Court, 29501
...1947, 225 Ind. 470, 75 N.E.2d 898; State ex rel. Buchanan v. Gerdink, 1947, 225 Ind. 473, 75 N.E.2d 899; State ex rel. Sanders v. Reeves, 1950, 228 Ind. 293, 91 N.E.2d 912. In the case of State ex rel. Wadsworth v. Mead, 1947, 225 Ind. 123, 73 N.E.2d 53, we held that notice should be served......