State v. Shores, 41590
| Decision Date | 07 November 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 41590,41590 |
| Citation | 345 P.2d 686,185 Kan. 586 |
| Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Thomas J. SHORES, Appellant. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The supreme court has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by a defendant in a criminal case, unless he takes his appeal within the time prescribed by G.S.1949, 62-1724. Following State v. Sims, 184 Kan. 587, 337 P.2d 704; State v. Shehi, 185 Kan. 551, 345 P.2d 684, and other decisions cited in this opinion.
2. Where a defendant in a criminal action makes no attempt to take an appeal from the judgment and sentence within the period of time prescribed by G.S.1949, 62-1724, a trial court commits no error in denying his subsequent motion for an order requiring that he be furnished with a transcript of the record of the trial at the expense of the county as an indigent person for the purpose of taking an appeal; and the overruling of suchmotion does not result in a violation of his constitutional rights under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Thomas J. Shores, pro se.
Wesley M. Norwood, County Atty., Lawrence, argued the cause, and John Anderson, Jr., Atty. Gen., was with him on the brief for appellee.
The undisputable facts leading up to the institution of this appeal are essential to a proper understanding of the single issue involved and should be stated.
Following a full and complete trial, at which he was at all times represented by counsel, the appellant, Thomas J. Shores, was found guilty by a jury on two counts of second degree forgery. Thereafter, and on June 8, 1956, upon the overruling of his motion for a new trial, he was sentenced by the district court to confinement in the state penitentiary for the commission of the crimes charged in such counts for the period of time prescribed by law. Subsequently he was taken to the penitentiary where he is now confined.
Appellant made no attempt to appeal from the judgment and sentence imposed against him within six months from the date of his sentence, as required by our statute (G.S.1949, 62-1724). Instead he waited until November 29, 1958. On that date, more than two years and five months after he had been sentenced and more than one year and eleven months after the date fixed by statute for the perfection of an appeal from the judgment and sentence, he filed a motion in the office of the clerk of the district court of Douglas County, alleging he was an indigent person and asking that the district court make an order directing that he be furnished with a complete transcript of the record of the trial in the case resulting in his judgment and sentence so that an appeal might be taken therefrom.
Upon consideration of the foregoing motion the district court, after pointing out the motion was filed by appellant for the purpose of enabling him to take an appeal, made findings of fact which, for all purposes here involved, may be said to be similar in substance to those heretofore related. It then found the appellant had taken no steps to appeal his conviction since the date he was sentenced and the time for such appeal had long since expired. Then, based upon such findings and conclusions, it denied the motion. Thereupon appellant perfected the instant appeal.
What has been heretofore related makes it apparent the sole question involved in this appeal is whether, under the existing facts and circumstances and controlling decisions, appellant's rights were infringed upon by reason of having been denied a free transcript for the purpose of taking an appeal from a judgment and sentence from which he had made no attempt to appeal until long after expiration of the time fixed by statute (G.S.1949, 62-1724) for the taking of appeals in criminal cases.
In approaching the foregoing question it may be conceded our code of criminal procedure (G.S.1949, 62-1701) gives a defendant in a criminal action an appeal to this court as a matter of right from any judgment against him and, under the circumstances set forth in G.S.1957 Supp., 62-1304, a free transcript to an indigent defendant for purposes of enabling him to prosecute the appeal. On the other hand it cannot be denied the same code (G.S.1949, 62-1724) limits the time (now six months) in which to appeal from such judgments and it must be admitted that under established decisions, commencing with our first reported decisions (Carr v. State, 1 Kan. 331; State v. King, 1 Kan. 466; State v. Ashmore, 19 Kan. 544) down to the present time (State v. Sims, 184 Kan. 587, 337 P.2d 704; State v. Shehi, 185 Kan. 551, 345 P.2d 684), this court has always construed the provisions of the last above mentioned se...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Shores
...had no right to an appeal or to a transcript of the trial at the expense of the county. All this is set out in detail in State v. Shores, 185 Kan. 586, 345 P.2d 686. Sometime in March, 1960, the appellant filed in the district court of Douglas county a paper entitled 'Affidavit of Poverty a......
-
State v. Thompson
...within the time prescribed by the statutes providing for such an appeal. (State v. Sims, 184 Kan. 587, 337 P.2d 704; State v. Shores, 185 Kan. 586, 345 P.2d 686.) Since the defendant Thompson failed to serve and file his notice of appeal by October 6, 1975, as required by the provisions of ......
-
State v. Ji
...by the statutes providing for such an appeal. See State v. Thompson, 221 Kan. 165, Syl. p 1, 558 P.2d 1079 (1976); State v. Shores, 185 Kan. 586, 588, 345 P.2d 686 (1959); and State v. Sims, 184 Kan. 587, 588, 337 P.2d 704 (1959). The Supreme Court has only such appellate jurisdiction as is......
-
State v. Henning
...within the time prescribed by the statutes providing for such an appeal. (State v. Sims, 184 Kan. 587, 337 P.2d 704; State v. Shores, 185 Kan. 586, 345 P.2d 686; and State v. Thompson and Pennington, 221 Kan. 165, 558 P.2d 1079.) The supreme court has only such appellate jurisdiction as is ......