State v. Sewell
Decision Date | 16 December 1943 |
Docket Number | 8632. |
Citation | 12 N.W.2d 198,69 S.D. 494 |
Parties | STATE v. SEWELL |
Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
Louis H. Smith, of Sioux Falls, for appellant.
George T. Mickelson, Atty. Gen., and Charles P. Warren, Asst. Atty Gen., Elmer G. Engebretson, State's Atty., of Webster Day County, and Frank S. Tait, of Milbank, for respondent.
The defendant Paul J. Sewell has appealed from a judgment imposing the death sentence founded upon his plea of guilty of the crime of murder, and from an order denying his motion, made after judgment, that the judgment be vacated and he be permitted to change his plea.
Of the several propositions assigned and argued, but one requires consideration, viz., that the court erred in receiving the plea of defendant without having advised him of his rights in the premises.
One Jens Jensen, late of Day County, was shot and instantly killed on November 3, 1941. The circumstances indicated that he was murdered and that the defendant may have committed the crime. Defendant was taken into custody on that day, and on November 6, without having had the advise of counsel, he signed a written confession. On November 8, 1941, he waived preliminary examination and was bound over to the circuit court. Later in that day an information was lodged in circuit court charging defendant with the crime of murder and he was taken before the court for arraignment. We quote from the minutes of the court as recorded by the official reporter.
(Thereupon the information was read by the state's attorney.)
Thereupon the court questioned the defendant, the sheriff and the coroner. In answer to the court's questions the defendant repeated the contents of his written confession. After a ten minute recess the court indicated that he was about to impose a death sentence. Before sentence was passed, however, the defendant interrupted, repudiated his confession, denied that he had killed Jens Jensen, stated that his confession was made up to protect the widow and daughter of the deceased, and said, Nevertheless, after some further questions, the court sentenced defendant.
The arraignment of a defendant who, having been charged with a public offense and held to answer by a committing magistrate desires to enter his plea of guilty of such offense, is authorized by SDC 34.2301. Upon such an arraignment, it is the duty of the presiding judge, before permitting an entry of the plea of guilty, "*** to fully advise such person of his rights in the premises, and if it appears to the satisfaction of such judge that the accused has been regularly held to answer upon the offense charged and is acting of his own free will...
To continue reading
Request your trial