State v. Clark
Decision Date | 11 April 1968 |
Citation | 105 N.J.Super. 381,252 A.2d 404 |
Parties | STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Warren L. CLARK, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division |
Paul Bangiola, Morris Plains, assigned counsel, for defendant-appellant.
Donald R. Del Monte, Asst. County Prosecutor, for plaintiff-respondent (Frank C. Scerbo, Morris County Prosecutor, attorney).
Before Judges SULLIVAN, FOLEY and LEONARD.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court denying his application for post conviction relief.
Defendant on June 12, 1964, in the presence of assigned counsel, entered a guilty plea to charges of carnal abuse, incestuous conduct between parent and child, contributing to the delinquency of a child, lewdness, and possession with intent to utter and expose obscene pictures.
On June 8, 1964, defendant executed Criminal Procedure Form 13A, in which he acknowledged, Inter alia, that he understood the nature of the offenses with which he had been charged and intended to plead guilty. Thereon, his assigned attorney certified that Clark had answered and signed the Form in the attorney's presence.
Following plea, the County Court judge, pursuant to N.J.S. 2A:164--3, N.J.S.A., ordered defendant to Menlo Park for examination. Thereafter, defendant was committed as a sex offender to the New Jersey State Hospital at Greystone Park for concurrent indeterminate terms for carnal abuse and lewdness. Clark was also sentenced to three concurrent terms at the Trenton State Prison for the three remaining offenses. The prison sentences were consecutive to the sex offender commitments.
On July 20, 1965 defendant escaped from Greystone. He was apprehended, and on November 12, 1965 entered a guilty plea to the crime of escape. For this offense, he was sentenced to Trenton for a term concurrent with the prison sentences previously imposed. On the same day that defendant pleaded guilty to the escape charge, the Commissioner of Institutions and Agencies, pursuant to N.J.S. 2A:164--7, N.J.S.A., ordered that defendant's commitment as a sex offender be transferred from Greystone to the Rahway State Prison Farm.
Defendant does not seek post-conviction relief from his escape conviction.
As to all the other convictions, defendant first contends that he was denied his right to the effective assistance of counsel. In support of this point he argues that his assigned counsel never informed him of the actual elements of the offenses that defendant had been accused of committing and never made any attempt to inquire into any possible defenses that he might have had. Specifically defendant urges that his counsel failed to obtain an independent psychiatric examination of him and thus gave no consideration to a possible defense of insanity. Based upon these contentions defendant requests us to permit him to withdraw his guilty pleas.
Defendant's execution of Form 13A weighs heavily against his assertion that his plea was not entered voluntarily and understandingly. State v. Herman, 47 N.J. 73, 77, 219 A.2d 413 (1966). Additionally, the record discloses that defendant's counsel at the plea spent considerable time explaining to Clark the latter's rights and the nature of the various offenses with which defendant had been charged. Likewise, the presiding judge repeatedly asked Clark if the latter understood the charges against him and knew what he was doing. Defendant responded in the affirmative to the court's questioning. We determine that the record supports the conclusion of the court below that defendant entered his guilty pleas voluntarily...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Fritz
...Dennis, supra, 46 N.J. at 478, 204 A.2d 868; State v. Coruzzi, supra, 189 N.J.Super. at 319-21, 460 A.2d 120; State v. Clark, 105 N.J.Super. 381, 384, 252 A.2d 404 (App.Div.1968). In some contexts, our courts have been willing to presume prejudice. This was the case in Jablonowski v. State,......
-
State v. Clark
...was also attacked. Counsel was assigned. The trial court denied relief and the Appellate Division affirmed on April 11, 1968. 105 N.J.Super. 381, 252 A.2d 404. In the meantime the sex offender act was amended, by L.1967, c. 274, approved January 11, 1968 and effective 30 days thereafter, to......
-
State v. Clark
...PER CURIAM: The judgment appealed from is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division. 105 N.J.Super. 381, 252 A.2d 404 (1968). In the event the defendant wishes to attack his administrative transfer to the State Prison Farm, Rahway, as an abuse of discretion......
- Consolidation Coal Co. v. Kandle