Todd v. State
| Decision Date | 16 October 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 5782,5782 |
| Citation | 485 S.W.2d 533,253 Ark. 283 |
| Parties | Frankie Joe TODD, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Charles L. 'Chuck' Honey, Prescott, for appellant.
Ray Thornton, Atty. Gen., by John D. Bridgforth, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.
Appellant pleaded guilty to the crime of second degree murder and was sentenced to 15 years in the state penitentiary with three years suspended. Subsequently, the trial court accorded him an evidentiary hearing based upon his allegations that the sentence was imposed in violation of his constitutional rights. This appeal results from a denial of his Rule 1 petition.
Appellant first contends for reversal that it was prejudicial error to permit a deputy prosecuting attorney to testify for the appellee-state at the evidentiary hearing. This witness testified that, before he became a prosecuting official, he represented appellant by court appointment at his arraignment. At this time he advised appellant about his rights and explained to him the possible penalty and parole eligibility. The attorney, also, conveyed to appellant the state's offer on a 'plea bargain' basis which was a five year sentence with three years suspended. Appellant declined the state's offer. Thereupon, the attorney interposed for appellant a plea of not guilty. This attorney had no further contact with appellant. Subsequently, appellant made bail and retained his own trial counsel. We are of the view that appellant has not demonstrated that his rights were prejudiced in any manner by this limited testimony of his court appointed counsel. Furthermore, since there was no objection to the testimony of this witness, the appellant is precluded from raising this contention for the first time on appeal. Ford v. State, 253 Ark. ---, 484 S.W.2d 90 (1972). See, also, 31 A.L.R.3d 953 § 16.
Appellant next contends that his plea of guilty was involuntary. This assertion appears to be based upon the argument that when appellant appeared in court he observed a jury in the court room which he thought was impaneled to try him on the alleged offense or for the higher offense of first degree murder which he understood might be brought against him. There was evidence adduced by the state that no jury was present at the time the appellant entered his plea of guilty. He admits his retained counsel represented him during the plea proceedings. Appellant has not demonstrated that his plea was induced by threats which would deprive it of the character of a voluntary act. Bradshaw v. State, 250 Ark. 135, 464 S.W.2d 614 (1971), Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 82 S.Ct. 510, 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962).
Appellant, also, asserts through his court appointed appellate counsel that the plea bargaining conducted in his behalf was unconstitutional because it was done under the constant threat of amending the charge of second degree murder to first degree murder which, therefore, constituted coercion. Appellant's guilty plea was the result of prolonged negotiations between his retained counsel and the prosecuting attorney. There is testimony to the effect that as a result of further investigation the prosecuting attorney felt he could justify amending the charge to first degree murder for which appellant could have received at least life imprisonment. Ark.Stat.Ann. (1964 Repl.) § 41--2227. A...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carter v. State
...see Williams v. State, 273 Ark. 371, 620 S.W.2d 277 (1981); Adams v. State, 253 Ark. 286, 485 S.W.2d 746 (1972); Todd v. State, 253 Ark. 283, 485 S.W.2d 533 (1972). Appellant's mere concern that he could be subjected to a greater sentence by proceeding to trial does not rise to the level of......
-
Logan v. State
...unless there is some evidence of specific misconduct. Upton v. State, 257 Ark. 424, 516 S.W.2d 904 (1974); cf. Todd v. State, 253 Ark. 283, 485 S.W.2d 533 (1972). The appellant next argues that the trial court erred in refusing to grant a change of venue. He submitted eleven (11) affidavits......
-
Thomas v. State, CR
...accused's justified fear of receiving a higher sentence if he went to trial did not warrant post-conviction relief. In Todd v. State, 253 Ark. 283, 485 S.W.2d 533 (1972), we said: "A plea of guilty even if induced by the possibility of a more severe sentence does not establish coercion." Id......
-
Akin v. State
...(1982); Williams v. State, 273 Ark. 371, 620 S.W.2d 277 (1981); Adams v. State, 253 Ark. 296, 485 S.W.2d 746 (1972); Todd v. State, 253 Ark. 283, 485 S.W.2d 533 (1972). Appellant's testimony also reflects that the decision to forego a trial and, if convicted, an appeal of the suppression is......