State v. Williams

CourtUnited States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
Writing for the CourtDUFFEY; DUFFY; BRYANT
Citation220 N.E.2d 837,8 Ohio App.2d 135
Decision Date25 October 1966
Parties, 37 O.O.2d 152 The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. WILLIAMS, Appellant.

Page 135

8 Ohio App.2d 135
220 N.E.2d 837, 37 O.O.2d 152
The STATE of Ohio, Appellee,
v.
WILLIAMS, Appellant.
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District, Franklin County.
Oct. 25, 1966.

C. Howard Johnson, Pros. Atty., and K. Michael Foley, Columbus, for appellee.

Murray Williams, in pro. per.

DUFFEY, Judge.

This is an appeal filed pursuant to Section 2953.23, Revised Code.

Appellant, an inmate of the Ohio Penitentiary, filed a petition for postconviction relief under Section 2953.21, Revised Code. The petition alleges that appellant pled guilty to an indictment for armed robbery without having counsel and being under the impression that he would have to conduct his own defense. He further alleges that the trial court failed to advise him of his right to counsel.

Original documents from case No. 37224 on the criminal doucket of Franklin County have been included in the file prepared by the Common Pleas Clerk of Courts. An examination of those documents shows an entry of a plea of guilty. There is

Page 136

nothing to indicate an appointment of counsel, and there is nothing to indicate that appellant was advised of his right to counsel.

The Common Pleas Court set the petition for hearing and appointed Mr. H. Alfred Glascor as attorney for appellant. At the hearing, the attorney stated appellant's basic contention, i. e., that he did not have, and was not advised of his right to, counsel when he pled guilty in 1958. In response to this statement of the attorney, the hearing judge observed that he himself had been the presiding judge in the criminal case, 'and I asked him, as I do all of them, if he had an attorney.' At this point, appellant interjected a statement that he did not recall being asked if he wanted an attorney, and stated that he was not advised of his right to one. A colloquy ensued between appellant and the judge. In essence, appellant maintained he had not been advised and the judge insisted that appellant had been asked if he wanted an attorney and had said no. Thereupon, the hearing was terminated. At no time was the appellant sworn to give testimony. No evidence by way of stipulation or otherwise was presented.

[220 N.E.2d 838] The petition alleges grounds for postconviction relief under Section 2953.21, Revised Code. The record of the original criminal proceedings does not fully rebut the allegation. Accordingly, in our opinion, appellant was entitled to an evidentiary hearing in which he would be provided an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Love v. State, No. 1070S249
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 25, 1971
    ...order is a final judgment.' (our emphasis.) See also, People v. Hamby (1965), 32 Ill.2d 291, 205 N.E.2d 456; State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, 220 N.E.2d 837. Both of these cases require special findings of fact in post-conviction relief proceedings. Without such findings we do n......
  • State v. McKinney, CASE NO. 4-11-01
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • July 18, 2011
    ...opportunity to prove his allegations." State v. Bays (Jan. 30, 1998), 2nd Dist. No. 96-CA-118, at *2, citing State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, 136, 220 N.E.2d 837. However, if it is determined that there are no substantive grounds for relief, the trial court may dismiss the petit......
  • State v. Richard R. Bays, 98-LW-0060
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • January 30, 1998
    ...is entitled to an evidentiary hearing in which he is provided an opportunity to prove his allegations." State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, paragraph one of the syllabus, 37 O.O.2d 152, 220 N.E.2d 837. Conversely, "[a] petition for post-conviction relief is subject to dismissal wit......
  • State v. Howald, 2008 Ohio 5404 (Ohio App. 10/20/2008), No. 14-08-23.
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • October 20, 2008
    ...an opportunity to prove his allegations." State v. Bays (Jan. 30, 1998), 2nd Dist. No. 96-CA-118 citing State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, 136, 220 N.E.2d {¶10} However, if the court determines that there are no substantive grounds for relief, it may dismiss the petition without a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Love v. State, No. 1070S249
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 25, 1971
    ...order is a final judgment.' (our emphasis.) See also, People v. Hamby (1965), 32 Ill.2d 291, 205 N.E.2d 456; State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, 220 N.E.2d 837. Both of these cases require special findings of fact in post-conviction relief proceedings. Without such findings we do n......
  • State v. McKinney, CASE NO. 4-11-01
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • July 18, 2011
    ...opportunity to prove his allegations." State v. Bays (Jan. 30, 1998), 2nd Dist. No. 96-CA-118, at *2, citing State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, 136, 220 N.E.2d 837. However, if it is determined that there are no substantive grounds for relief, the trial court may dismiss the petit......
  • State v. Richard R. Bays, 98-LW-0060
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • January 30, 1998
    ...is entitled to an evidentiary hearing in which he is provided an opportunity to prove his allegations." State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, paragraph one of the syllabus, 37 O.O.2d 152, 220 N.E.2d 837. Conversely, "[a] petition for post-conviction relief is subject to dismissal wit......
  • State v. Howald, 2008 Ohio 5404 (Ohio App. 10/20/2008), No. 14-08-23.
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • October 20, 2008
    ...an opportunity to prove his allegations." State v. Bays (Jan. 30, 1998), 2nd Dist. No. 96-CA-118 citing State v. Williams (1966), 8 Ohio App.2d 135, 136, 220 N.E.2d {¶10} However, if the court determines that there are no substantive grounds for relief, it may dismiss the petition without a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT