State v. DeCoe, 4160
| Decision Date | 24 April 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 4160,4160 |
| Parties | STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Michael Ray DeCOE, Appellant. |
| Court | Arizona Supreme Court |
John A. LaSota, Jr., Atty. Gen., Bruce E. Babbitt, Former Atty. Gen., William J. Schafer, III, Chief Counsel, Crim. Div., Crane McClennen, Asst. Attys. Gen., Phoenix, for appellee.
Ross P. Lee, Maricopa County Public Defender, Terry J. Adams, Deputy Public Defender, Phoenix, for appellant.
Michael Ray DeCoe pled guilty to second degree murder, and received a sentence of 15 to 35 years in the Arizona State Penitentiary. Subsequently he filed this appeal, and we have taken jurisdiction pursuant to 17A A.R.S. Rules of the Supreme Court, Rule 47(e).
Two issues have been raised:
(1) Whether appellant was properly informed of the nature of the charge?
(2) Whether an adequate factual basis existed for the guilty plea.
Relying on Henderson v. Morgan, 426 U.S. 637, 96 S.Ct. 2253, 49 L.Ed.2d 108 (1976), appellant asserts he was not adequately informed of intent being a necessary element for second degree murder. During the plea hearing, the court addressed appellant:
.
We believe this explanation adequately satisfies the requirements of Henderson v. Morgan, supra.
Next, appellant contends the record contains an insufficient fact basis to support his guilty plea. Prior to accepting a plea of guilty, the court need only ascertain the existence of "strong evidence" of guilt. It is not necessary to find a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Norris, 113 Ariz. 558, 558 P.2d 903 (1976); North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970).
Although appellant claimed he shot the victim in self-defense, the record indicates the following events occurred on the day of the crime. Appellant and the victim had been living together in the victim's apartment. The two argued on the day of the shooting, and the victim left the apartment. Before the victim returned, appellant went into the bedroom, picked up a handgun and loaded it. When the victim returned, the argument continued and appellant fired a shot at the victim, but missed. According to appellant, the victim then walked into the bedroom and brought out a rifle. He sat down, laying the rifle on the floor nearby. Appellant claims the victim started to bend over, as if to reach for the rifle, so appellant shot him....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n v. Superior Court, In and For County of Maricopa
... ... 70 ... SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS' ASSOCIATION, Petitioner, ... SUPERIOR COURT of the State of Arizona, in and for the COUNTY OF MARICOPA; Daniel A. Barker, a judge thereof, Respondent ... ...
-
Bledsoe v. Goodfarb, s. CV-91-0122-S
... ... The Honorable Stanley Z. GOODFARB, Judge of the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the County of Maricopa, Respondent, ... SALT RIVER VALLEY WATER USERS ... ...
-
State v. Hamilton, 5985
...McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970), and there is strong evidence of guilt, see State v. DeCoe, 118 Ariz. 502, 578 P.2d 181 (1978). See State v. Leinweber, 121 Ariz. 435, 437 n. 2, 590 P.2d 1381, 1383 n. 2 ...
-
State v. Gannon
...the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but rather on ascertaining the existence of "strong evidence" of guilt. State v. DeCoe, 118 Ariz. 502, 578 P.2d 181 (1978). The lesser standard of "strong evidence" of guilt is met in this case. The defendant made statements to the police that......