State v. Goodwin

Decision Date08 November 1965
Docket NumberNo. 2,No. 51500,51500,2
Citation396 S.W.2d 548
PartiesSTATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Marcus GOODWIN, Appellant
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Howard L. McFadden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Marcus Goodwin, pro se.

BARRETT, Commissioner.

For shooting, stabbing and killing his common-law wife, Mazie Lee, Marcus Goodwin was found guilty of murder in the first degree and sentenced to be executed. After his conviction was affirmed in this court, State v. Goodwin, Mo., 352 S.W.2d 614, the Governor of Missouri commuted his sentence to life imprisonment. Thereafter, in March 1962, on appellant's behalf, there was filed in this court an application for habeas corpus and in that proceeding all relevant documents not only of his trial, the full transcript of which was available to this court, but his complete hospital records were before this court. In the trial of his case he was represented by experienced trial counsel, and, despite his present attacks on his lawyers, was represented in his habeas corpus proceeding by two noted lawyers, including a former president of the Missouri Bar Association. After 'evidence heard in this habeas corpus proceeding' in this court en banc, the petition for habeas corpus was denied, In re Goodwin, Mo., 359 S.W.2d 601, and the Supreme Court of the United States denied certiorari on November 19, 1962, 371 U.S. 915, 83 S.Ct. 262, 9 L.Ed.2d 174.

And now on his own behalf, being permitted to proceed as a poor person, Marcus Goodwin filed in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, where he was of course convicted originally, a motion to vacate and set aside judgment under Criminal Rule 27.26, V.A.M.R. In this proceeding the petition in habeas corpus was also appended but the circuit court, in February 1965, summarized the issues attempted to be raised in the proceeding and found that on the record before the court they were without merit and denied his motion to vacate. It is not necessary upon this appeal to detail any of the facts, or for that matter to detail the claims here, they are all set forth in the former opinions and files of this court. It is sufficient to say that on this appeal he makes the same claims of insanity, (in part belied by the papers he has personally filed) and improper representation of counsel that he made on the original appeal or in his application for habeas corpus, all of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Goodwin v. Swenson, 1079.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • July 2, 1968
    ...to life imprisonment. There is still a third reported decision concerning petitioner in the Supreme Court of Missouri, Missouri v. Goodwin, Div. 2, 1965, 396 S.W.2d 548. That case affirmed the denial, without evidentiary hearing, of a postconviction motion filed by petitioner pro se in his ......
  • White v. Swenson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • November 17, 1966
    ...has granted a hearing and denied the writ on the merits, the convict has exhausted his State post-conviction remedies. (See State v. Goodwin, Mo., 396 S.W.2d 548). 3. When a State convict has litigated in the trial court and presented on direct appeal the precise claim of violation of Feder......
  • State v. Nolan
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 10, 1967
    ...has been made or refused by any court officer or officer superior to the one to whom the petition is presented. '' In State v. Goodwin, Mo., 396 S.W.2d 548, a previous hearing on the prisoner's application for a writ of habeas corpus, a full evidentiary proceeding, with all relevant documen......
  • Evans v. State of Missouri
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • July 31, 1969
    ...on its merits adversely to petitioner can state remedies be deemed exhausted with respect thereto. Section 2254, supra; State v. Goodwin, Mo., 396 S.W.2d 548. If the confinement without trial continues into a third term of court, petitioner should file an application for discharge under Sec......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT