State v. Tahash
Citation | 278 Minn. 358,154 N.W.2d 689 |
Decision Date | 24 November 1967 |
Docket Number | No. 40567,40567 |
Parties | STATE of Minnesota ex rel. Jack Willis FORD, Appellant, v. Relph H. TAHASH, Warden, Minnesota State Prison, Respondent. |
Court | Supreme Court of Minnesota (US) |
Syllabus by the Court
1. When viewed in light of the record, as it related to defendant's original arraignment and plea of guilty to charge of passing worthless checks (Minn.St. 609.52, subd. 2(3)(a) and (4)), which included evidence adduced before trial court at postconviction hearing, defendant's claim that he was misled into a plea of guilty by false assurances of his court-appointed counsel found to be without merit.
2. Defendant's constitutional privilege against self-incrimination was not violated when he passed through a room in the sheriff's office in which were seated three witnesses, some of whom had accepted bad checks written by him. The Constitution confers no right on an accused to be immune from the eyes of his accusers.
C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, Ronald L. Haskvitz, and Robert E. Oliphant, Asst. Public Defenders, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Douglas M. Head, Atty. Gen., Gerard W. Snell, Acting Sol. Gen., David J. Byron, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, for respondent.
This is an appeal from an order of the district court discharging a writ of habeas corpus. Defendant was sentenced to a term of 5 years on a plea of guilty to an information charging him with theft by false representation in passing worthless checks under Minn.St. 609.52, subd. 2(3)(a) and (4).
Defendant contends (1) that he was misled into a plea of guilty by the false assurances of his court-appointed counsel as a result of which his plea was not freely and voluntarily entered, and (2) that defendant was denied his rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution when he was subjected to an identification process without being informed of that fact.
1. At the evidentiary hearing it was defendant's contention that his court-appointed counsel assured him that he would be sentenced for a period of not longer than 1 year and, that, contrary to this assurance, the court sentenced him to a term of not to exceed 5 years. After considering the evidence on this issue, the habeas court determined that the claim was without merit. The following excerpts from the transcript of the proceedings indicate that at the time the guilty plea was entered, a defendant was aware of the fact that he was not obligated to plead guilty and that the plea was not induced by promises of counsel:
'
The asserted error is much the same as that considered by this court in State ex rel. Dinneen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 7, 136 N.W.2d 847. We conclude that the evidence amply supports the trial court's conclusion that the claim of asserted error is without merit.
2. With reference to defendant's further claim that he was required to submit to identification in violation of his rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, the record indicates that while defendant was in custody prior to trial he was called from his cell to the sheriff's office. While being escorted to the sheriff's office, h...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Martinez v. State
...v. Dunlap, 271 N.C. 508, 157 S.W.2d 118 (N.C.); People v. Ballott, 20 N.Y.2d 600, 286 N.Y.S.2d 1, 233 N.E.2d 103; State ex rel. Ford v. Tahash, 278 Minn. 358, 154 N.W.2d 689; People v. Smiley, 54 Misc.2d 826, 284 N.Y.S.2d 265; People v. Feggans, 67 A.C. 447, 62 Cal.Rptr. 419, 432 P.2d 21; P......
-
State v. Diamond, A15-2075
..."at a prisoner and compar[ing] his features with a photograph in proof." Id. at 253, 31 S.Ct. 2 ; see also State ex rel. Ford v. Tahash , 278 Minn. 358, 154 N.W.2d 689, 691 (1967) ("[T]here is a distinction between bodily view and requiring the accused to testify against himself."); State v......
-
People v. Nelson, 40729
...Constitution confers no right of an accused to be immune from the eyes of his accusers." (State of Minn. ex rel. Ford v. Tahash (1967), 278 Minn. 358, 154 N.W.2d 689, 691.) In United States v. Wade, the Supreme Court held that the exhibition of a criminal suspect at a lineup does not violat......
-
Graham v. State, 40903
...not been deprived of due process. See State v. Hill (Mo.) 419 S.W.2d 46; State v. Batchelor (Mo.) 418 S.W.2d 929; State ex rel. Ford v. Tahash (Minn.1967) 154 N.W.2d 689. Cf. People v. Ballot (1967) 20 N.Y.2d 600, 286 N.Y.S.2d 1, 233 N.E.2d Appellant urges additional error on the ground tha......