State v. Boutte

• Decision Date: 13 May 1907
• Docket Number: 16,593
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. BOUTTE

43 So. 983

119 La. 134

STATE v. BOUTTE

No. 16,593

Supreme Court of Louisiana

May 13, 1907

Appeal from Seventeenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Vermilion; William Pierreport Edwards, Judge.

Smith Boutte was convicted of assault with intent to kill, and appeals. Affirmed.

John Nash Ogden and Ogden & Robira, for appellant.

Walter Guion, Atty. Gen., and John Nugier, J., Dist. Atty. (Lewis Guion, of counsel), for the State.

OPINION

NICHOLLS J.

The complaint urged in this court by counsel for and on behalf of the defendant is that the district judge improperly refused to allow them to withdraw a plea of guilty to "cutting and stabbing with a dangerous weapon with intent to kill," which accused had been permitted to enter in lieu of his original plea of not guilty to a charge of "willfully, feloniously, and of his malice aforethought cutting and stabbing one Jack Sinegaul with intent to kill and murder," and to allow him to enter a plea of not guilty, in order to be tried by a jury. The plea sought to be withdrawn had been accepted by the district attorney and the court, and had been entered on the minutes of the court.

The application to withdraw the plea was contained in the following motion:

"State of Louisiana v. Smith Boutte. No. 1,770. 17th Jud. Dis

"The defendant in the above-entitled cause would respectfully represent that at this term of court he entered the plea of guilty of cutting and stabbing with intent to kill; that he had no means to employ counsel; that the plea was only recently entered; and that there will be a jury to try criminal cases week after next, when his case could be tried.

"He respectfully prays that he be permitted to withdraw the plea of guilty, and enter the plea of not guilty, in order to be tried by a jury.

"He respectfully represents that he is now able to employ counsel, and that his motion is not made for delay but in order to obtain substantial justice."

This application having been denied defendant, a bill of exceptions was reserved, which is relied upon as entitling defendant to a reversal of the judgment. It reads as follows:

"Be it remembered that on this day, the 6th day of April, 1907 the accused moved by written plea in open court to be permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty, and enter the plea of not guilty, which motion was refused by his honor, the presiding judge, for the following reasons, viz.:

"'The accused was admitted to bail on this charge (preferred by affidavit) November 12, 1906, was indicted March 6, 1907, and arraigned the following day. The attorneys who had petitioned for bail stood by him at arraignment.

"'His trial was fixed for April 1, 1907. On that day the court appointed a member of the bar to assist him, for the reason that he had failed to pay, or make arrangement to pay, his chosen attorneys, and was without a lawyer on the day fixed for trial. The appointed counsel moved for delay, which was granted, to enable him to prepare for the defense. Two days later, when the case was called for trial pursuant to assignment, the accused withdrew the plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty to the charge of cutting and stabbing with a dangerous weapon with intent to kill. He was fully informed of the nature of the charge against him, and told in open court what the penalties were, and interrogated by the court on the point of its being his voluntary act, and answered twice that it was. Thereupon the jury was discharged for the day, and all witnesses finally.

"'The accused knew full well what he was doing when he pleaded guilty. He was assisted by able counsel, who knew better what the outcome of the trial would be than he could.

"'The motion for leave to withdraw the plea of guilty was filed when the prisoner was brought into court for sentence, and must be based on the theory that paid attorneys will do more than attorneys who are appointed by the court for the accused. I know that the attorney appointed and who acted under appointment did all he could for the accused, and believed he could secure more for him by the plea than by standing trial and risking a verdict.'

"To which ruling of the court the accused excepts, and accordingly tenders this his bill of exception, which was read and signed in open court before sentence."

The crime with which defendant was charged was one which would carry with it (if the indictment should be sustained) an ...