State v. Garner
| Decision Date | 13 March 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 52112,No. 2,52112,2 |
| Citation | 412 S.W.2d 155 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Eugene Melvin GARNER, a/k/a Geno Garner, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Eugene Melvin Garner, pro se.
Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Thomas J. Downey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.
This is an appeal from the denial without an evidentiary hearing of a motion and amended motion to vacate judgment and sentence filed in the trial court pursuant to Rule 27.26, V.A.M.R. Defendant filed briefs and argued his case pro se.
Defendant was charged in the Circuit Court of Franklin County by information filed July 14, 1965, with uttering and delivering a check for $305.00 to Missourian Publishing Company, Inc., with intent to defraud, knowing at the time of uttering and delivering the check that he did not have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for payment in full of said check on presentation.
The transcript on appeal indicates that counsel for defendant was appointed in the trial court, that defendant and his appointed counsel appeared for arraignment, that a plea of guilty was entered, and that defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of four years. The transcript further indicates that on defendant's application an order granting probation was entered, that a probation bond of $1,000.00 was fixed and filed, and that defendant signed a probation agreement setting forth the terms of probation. All of these orders were entered July 14, 1965.
The transcript next discloses an order of the Circuit Court on October 16, 1965, which states that it appears to the court that defendant has violated the terms of probation granted him and that a capias warrant is ordered issued for defendant.
The next order appearing in the transcript was on December 9, 1965. It recites that an informal hearing was held on that date and that the probation granted July 14, 1965, is revoked 'because the defendant admits that he has violated his probation.' The record discloses that defendant was then taken to the Department of Correction to serve the four-year sentence.
Several of the assignments in the motion to vacate are too general to present anything for review. The motion does seem to allege, however, that the plea of guilty entered for defendant was without his consent and that he was not present in court when judgment and sentence was pronounced. This is contrary to what the transcript on appeal shows, for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roach v. Bennett, 18914.
...Institution, 1 Md.App. 23, 226 A.2d 358 (1967). In Missouri it is discretionary, but preferred in all instances. State v. Garner, 412 S.W.2d 155 (Mo.Sup.Ct.1967). In Kansas, only if substantial questions of law or triable issues of fact are presented. Carter v. State, 199 Kan. 290, 428 P.2d......
-
Fields v. State
...counsel would be required in most cases. This was recognized during the early days under the amended rule. We stated in State v. Garner, 412 S.W.2d 155, 157 (Mo.1967), that "we cannot help but observe that assistance of counsel in preparing and filing an amended motion adequately stating al......
-
State v. Garner, 53277
...to four years' imprisonment and in 1966 filed a motion to vacate the judgment and sentence. Pursuant to an opinion in State v. Garner, Mo., 412 S.W.2d 155, he was given a hearing upon his motion, the motion was denied and he has again appealed. In this court his court-appointed counsel cont......
-
Drew v. State
...requirements of Rule 25.04, shall be given an evidentiary hearing if issues of fact are raised in the motion. Rule 27.26(e); State v. Garner, Mo.Sup., 412 S.W.2d 155. In this situation, if it be found on all the evidence 'that the plea of guilty was in fact voluntary and was made with an un......