Warner v. State, 24254.

Docket NºNo. 24254.
Citation143 N.E. 288, 194 Ind. 426
Case DateApril 01, 1924
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

194 Ind. 426
143 N.E. 288

WARNER
v.
STATE.

No. 24254.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

April 1, 1924.


Appeal from Criminal Court, Marion County.

Henry C. Warner was convicted of grand larceny, and he appeals. Reversed, and defendant discharged.


Clyde P. Miller, of Indianapolis, for appellant.

U. S. Lesh, Atty. Gen., and Mrs. Edward F. White, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.


TRAVIS, J.

Appellant brings this appeal from a judgment which imposed a fine and imprisonment, upon his plea of guilty to the charge by indictment of grand larceny.

April 8, 1921, the indictment which charged appellant with grand larceny was returned in open court. April 23, 1921, appellant waived arraignment. The order book entry made by the clerk of the court of the proceedings in relation to arraignment was to the effect that appellant waived arraignment and pleaded not guilty, which was followed by trial by the court, at which evidence was heard, and that the finding was taken under advisement by the court. May 11, 1921, the next order book entry was that the defendant be released on his own recognizance pending the further order of the court. The defendant remained at large until October 2, 1922, when he was produced in court by the sheriff under the order of the court. At this time the original order book entries in the cause were changed (by erasure and interlineation), by the order of the court, and were made to read that upon arraignment the defendant entered a plea of guilty, and the finding was taken under advisement. And the part of the order which recited a plea of not guilty, that a trial was had, and evidence heard, was erased. The court thereupon rendered judgment without making a finding of guilty, which judgment was that the defendant be fined and committed to the state prison. The defendant thereupon filed a motion to require the clerk to reinstate on the order book and the clerk's docket all matter erased therefrom or changed by him, and that the original entries therein made be reinstated, and that the judgment of fine and imprisonment be vacated and set aside and all process stayed thereunder. Motions for a new trial and arrest of judgment then followed respectively. All of said motions were overruled.

The issues involve the action of the trial court (1) in changing the order of the court as recorded in the order book, (2) rendering judgment without a finding having been made upon the defendant's plea of guilty, (3) and in adjudging that the defendant pay a fine and be committed to the state prison, after having been released on his own recognizance for nearly a year and a half before judgment upon the plea of guilty.

[1] 1. Upon being brought before the court October 2, 1922, for sentence, defendant ob

[143 N.E. 289]

jected for the reason that the records as made by the clerk of the action of the court showed that on April 23, 1921, he was arraigned, waived arraignment, and pleaded not guilty; that a trial was had and evidence heard, and the finding taken under advisement; and that the court had no power or authority to change such record, charging that the change was not supported by any written note or memorandum which would dispute the truth of the order as made. An examination of the record shows that appellant is incorrect. The court based this action in changing the record upon an entry made by him upon the back of the indictment at the time appellant was arraigned and pleaded thereto, and that such entry was that appellant pleaded guilty, from which it is plain that the orders entered by the clerk in the order book were at variance with, and contrary to, the minute made by the judge of the court on the back of the indictment at the time of arraignment. A court has the inherent power to correct the errors in its records of a case, to make such records speak the truth or to be in accord with the actual facts of the case. Moerecke v. Bryan (1915) 183 Ind. 591, 108 N. E. 948;Pere Marquette R. Co. v. Strange (1908) 171 Ind. 160, 84 N. E. 819, 85 N. E. 1026, 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1041;Boonville Bank v. Blakey (1906) 166 Ind. 427, 76 N. E. 529;Johnson v. Gebhauer (1902) 159 Ind. 271, 64 N. E. 855;Knowlton v. Dolan (1898) 151 Ind. 79, 51 N. E. 97;Suloj v. Retlaw (1914) 57 Ind. App. 302, 107 N. E. 18;Pursley v. Wickle (1891) 4 Ind. App. 382, 30 N. E. 1115; 15 C. J. 975. Such a correction of its records by the court may be made at any time while a cause is in fieri and prior to rendering judgment or decree. Boonville Bank v. Blakey, supra. The correction may be made upon motion and notice to the opposite party, but the power to act is not limited to a move by either party; the court by virtue of its inherent right has the power to correct the records of its actions by supplying omitted entries and correcting erroneous ones, acting solely upon its own knowledge and without notice to either party. Moerecke v. Bryan, supra; Gilman v. Libbey, 4 Cliff. 447, Fed. Cas. No. 5,445; McGuire v. Gilbert, 180 Ill. 96, 54 N....

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • Schiro v. State, No. 1181S329
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 5, 1983
    ...made in the court's order book, as was the case in Neuenschwander v. State, (1928) 200 Ind. 64, 161 N.E. 369, and Warner v. State, (1924) 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288, or they may serve to change or supplement an entry already existing in the order book as was the case in Apple v. Greenfield ......
  • State v. Wright, No. 54604
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 15, 1972
    ...to revoke the unauthorized order and impose sentence October 7, 1970. People v. Penn, 302 Ill. 488, 135 N.E. 92; Warner v. State, 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288; Ex Parte Brown (Mo.App.), 297 S.W. 445; Collins v. State, 24 Okl.Cr. 117, 217 P. 896, cited by defendant in support of his contention......
  • Taylor v. State, 29102
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • June 15, 1954
    ......Warner v. State, . Page 167 . 1924, 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288, that a defendant is entitled to have sentence pronounced with reasonable promptness. ......
  • Tina T., Matter of, s. 49S00-9008-JV-576
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • September 30, 1991
    ......31-6-14-6, a local coordinating committee (LCC) is to be established in each county of this State to review restrictive placements 1 of wards which have been proposed by a referring agency. 2 ... Warner v. State (1924), 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288; Smith v. State (1919), 188 Ind. 64, 121 N.E. 829, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • Schiro v. State, No. 1181S329
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 5, 1983
    ...made in the court's order book, as was the case in Neuenschwander v. State, (1928) 200 Ind. 64, 161 N.E. 369, and Warner v. State, (1924) 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288, or they may serve to change or supplement an entry already existing in the order book as was the case in Apple v. Greenfield ......
  • State v. Wright, No. 54604
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 15, 1972
    ...to revoke the unauthorized order and impose sentence October 7, 1970. People v. Penn, 302 Ill. 488, 135 N.E. 92; Warner v. State, 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288; Ex Parte Brown (Mo.App.), 297 S.W. 445; Collins v. State, 24 Okl.Cr. 117, 217 P. 896, cited by defendant in support of his contention......
  • Taylor v. State, 29102
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • June 15, 1954
    ......Warner v. State, . Page 167 . 1924, 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288, that a defendant is entitled to have sentence pronounced with reasonable promptness. ......
  • Tina T., Matter of, s. 49S00-9008-JV-576
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • September 30, 1991
    ......31-6-14-6, a local coordinating committee (LCC) is to be established in each county of this State to review restrictive placements 1 of wards which have been proposed by a referring agency. 2 ... Warner v. State (1924), 194 Ind. 426, 143 N.E. 288; Smith v. State (1919), 188 Ind. 64, 121 N.E. 829, ......
  • 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