Stilley v. People, 21826
| Docket Nº | No. 21826 |
| Citation | 417 P.2d 494, 160 Colo. 329 |
| Case Date | August 08, 1966 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Colorado |
Page 494
v.
The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Defendant in Error.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 6, 1966.
[160 Colo. 330]
Page 495
William A. Black, H. Malcolm Mackay, Denver, for plaintiffs in error.Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Atty. Gen., James F. Pamp, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendant in error.
PER CURIAM.
This is a review of the trial court's denial, after hearing, of a motion under Rule 35(b), Colo.R.Crim.P., filed jointly by the plaintiffs in error. Their motion, as amended, sought an order vacating the judgment and conviction and an order permitting the defendants to withdraw their pleas of guilty and enter pleas of not guilty.
[160 Colo. 331] The defendants were charged with murder in the first degree for the killing of one Darrell J. Suer in 1962. To this charge the defendant Scheer entered pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. The defendant Stilley entered a plea of not guilty. On the day set for trial, at the request of counsel for the defendants a conference was held in chambers, at which time respective counsel for both defendants advised the court that it was their understanding that the People's evidence was solely circumstantial and, under the statute, would not warrant the imposition of the death penalty. They further informed the court that it was the desire of both defendants to withdraw their prior pleas and enter pleas of guilty.
Both defendants were represented by competent counsel, experienced in the trial of criminal cases. The court, in chambers, examined both the defendants at length, explained to them the rights that they were waiving by the entry of such a plea and that by such procedure they were removing themselves only from the possibility of one of the penalties provided by law and, further, that they would be submitting themselves to imprisonment for life.
In open court the defendants formally changed their pleas, at which time they were further advised by the court. A jury was thereupon impaneled. In his opening statement the deputy district attorney stated that the People's case was based solely on circumstantial evidence. Based upon this opening statement counsel for both of the defendants moved the court for directed verdicts providing for a penalty of life imprisonment, and further stated that they, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Zapata, 88SC153
...of his acts. People v. Collins, 730 P.2d 293 (Colo.1986); People v. Shackelford, 182 Colo. 48, 511 P.2d 19 (1973); Stilley v. People, 160 Colo. 329, 417 P.2d 494 (1966); Palmer v. Gleason, 154 Colo. 145, 389 P.2d 90 (1964); Gray v. People, 139 Colo. 583, 342 P.2d 627 (1959). The invited err......
-
Marshall v. People, 21635
...Roll v. People, 132 Colo. 1, 284 P.2d 665, since the gist of the conspiracy is the unlawful agreement. Here the evidence established [160 Colo. 329] that the defendant and his accomplices acted in concert to concoct a swindling operation wherein Bradshaw was duped into parting with his mone......
-
Hansen v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 96SC716
...50, 511 P.2d 19, 20 (1973)(holding that defendant may not complain he is prejudiced by testimony his counsel elicits); Stilley v. People, 160 Colo. 329, 332-33, 417 P.2d 494, 495- Page 1385 96 (1966)(holding that defendant "cannot successfully allege error to the ruling of the court made on......
-
State v. Owsley, 14364
...defendant successfully allege error in a ruling of the court, when the defendant himself requested the ruling. Stilley v. People, 160 Colo. 329, 417 P.2d 494 (1966); People v. Reeves, 64 Cal.2d 766, 51 Cal.Rptr. [105 Idaho 838] Page 438 691, 415 P.2d 35 (1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 952, 8......