State v. Smith
Decision Date | 11 December 1967 |
Docket Number | No. 2,No. 52278,52278,2 |
Citation | 421 S.W.2d 501 |
Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Dee Mitchell SMITH, Appellant |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, J. L. Anding, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Pacific, for respondent.
Charles Powell, Jr., Macon, for appellant.
An information filed in the Circuit Court of Macon County on December 13, 1965, charged defendant, Dee Mitchell Smith with statutory rape. Section 559.260, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. On February 16, 1966, defendant appeared with his attorney, Charles A. Powell, Jr., entered a plea of guilty to the charge, was sentenced to imprisonment for two years, applied for and was denied parole, and then sought to withdraw the plea of guilty.
In State v. Williams, Mo.Sup., 361 S.W.2d 772, at 775, this Court stated: '
The record shows the following occurred on February 16, 1966:
The transcript made at the time the plea was taken reads as follows:
'(The prosecutor makes a statement to the court.)
'(Comments were made by counsel for the defendant.)
On February...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Russell v. Wyrick
...and understandingly made. "These determinations are made by the judge at the time of the plea — when the plea is entered. State v. Smith, 421 S.W.2d 501, 504 Mo.Sup. 1967. It is irrelevant that the defendant has counsel. State v. Arnold, 419 S.W.2d 59, 62 (Mo. Sup.1967). It is the duty of t......
-
State v. Reaves
...of a guilty plea before it is accepted. Upon review, the necessary determination must affirmatively appear in the record. State v. Smith, 421 S.W.2d 501 (Mo.1967); see also Flood v. State, 476 S.W.2d 529 (Mo.1972), where a special concurrence recommends a checklist for use by trial 26. Mont......
-
Flood v. State, 56269
...plead anew. In support of his position he cites State v. Reese, Mo., 457 S.W.2d 713; State v. Williams, Mo., 361 S.W.2d 772; State v. Smith, Mo., 421 S.W.2d 501; and State v. Blaylock, Mo., 394 S.W.2d 364. 2 Unlike Federal Rule 11 3 (as amended effective July 1, 1966) our Rule 25.04 does no......
-
State v. Rose
...See also State v. Hovis, 353 Mo. 602, 183 S.W.2d 147, 148(1, 2); State v. Williams, Mo.Sup., 361 S.W.2d 772, 775(3, 4); State v. Smith, 421 S.W.2d 501, 502. Appellant also calls attention to the statement in State v. Dale, 282 Mo. 663, 222 S.W. 763, 764: 'It is immaterial whether the mislea......