State v. Olbekson

• Decision Date: 16 May 1968
• Docket Number: CA-CR,No. 1,1
• Citation: State v. Olbekson, 441 P.2d 71, 7 Ariz.App. 474 (Ariz. App. 1968)
• Parties: STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Kenneth H. OLBEKSON, Appellant. 135.
• Writing for the Court: STEVENS; CAMERON, C.J., and DONOFRIO
• Court: Arizona Court of Appeals

Page 71

441 P.2d 71

7 Ariz.App. 474

STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Kenneth H. OLBEKSON, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 135.

Court of Appeals of Arizona.

May 16, 1968.

Darrell F. Smith, Atty. Gen., by, Carl Waag, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Vernon B. Croaff, Public Defender, by, Grant Laney, Deputy Public Defender, for appellant.

STEVENS, Judge.

This is an appeal by the defendant, Olbekson, from a judgment of guilt and sentence entered on a charge of Grand Theft, a felony, for violation of A.R.S. §§ 13--661 and 13--663.

On 27 December 1966, a criminal complaint was entered in the Northwest Phoenix Justice Court charging the defendant and three other persons with Count I, Robbery, a felony, and Count II, Assault with Intent to Commit Robbery, a felony. A preliminary hearing was held on 11 January 1967. The defendant was represented by the Public Defender at this time. At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, the Justice of the Peace found that there was probable cause on both counts. An information was filed in the Superior Court for Maricopa County on 24 January 1967 charging the defendant with the same two offenses. Arraignment in the Superior Court was held on 30 January 1967 at which time the defendant plead not guilty. A trial date was set for 6 March 1967. On 6 March 1967, in the Superior Court, the defendant withdrew his former pleas of not guilty and entered a plea of guilty to an amended information charging Grand Theft, a felony. The defendant was represented by the Public Defender at the arraignment of 30 January and at the time that his plea of guilty was entered. When the amended information was filed it was stipulated by the defendant and his counsel that the amended information was filed without objection for the purpose of entering a plea of guilty. It was further stipulated that if at a subsequent time the plea be withdrawn for any reason, the information could be re-amended to allege the charges contained in the original information. At the later arraignment, the trial court questioned the defendant as to the voluntariness of his plea of guilty. The Court found that the entry of the plea of guilty had been 'knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made'. On 22 March 1967, the defendant was sentenced to serve a term of not less than three years nor more than ten years in the Arizona State Prison. The defendant was represented at the time of sentencing by the Public Defender's office.

After the defendant had been sentenced he mailed a handwritten document entitled 'Motion for Appeal' to Division One, Court of Appeals. The defendant set forth several grounds in support of his motion for appeal and the Court of Appeals sent this document to the Superior Court with directions that it be treated as a notice of appeal. The Public Defender's office was notified and a brief was submitted by the Public Defender on behalf of the defendant. The defendant also submitted a handwritten document in his own behalf setting forth several grounds as a basis for reversal of the judgment of the trial court. He stated, among other things, that he had not been properly represented by legal counsel at crucial points in the proceedings and that he had been coerced into entering a plea of guilty. We have reviewed the records in this case and find no basis to support the defendant's allegations. He was well...