Williamson v. State, 52098

Decision Date24 September 1980
Docket NumberNo. 52098,52098
Citation388 So.2d 168
PartiesRobert T. WILLIAMSON v. STATE of Mississippi.
CourtMississippi Supreme Court

W. S. Moore, Jackson, for appellant.

Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Carolyn B. Mills, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before SUGG, BROOM and LEE, JJ.

LEE, Justice, for the Court:

Robert T. Williamson was convicted in the Circuit Court of Scott County for the sale of marijuana in a quantity greater than one (1) kilogram, and was sentenced to fifteen (15) years in the Mississippi State Penitentiary, said sentence to run consecutively with a previous sentence received by him in Rankin County, where he was sentenced to twenty-seven (27) years imprisonment with twenty-one (21) years suspended. Williamson has appealed and assigns two (2) errors in the trial below.

I.

The appellant first contends that the lower court erred in refusing to accept his plea of guilty.

Appellant attempted to plead guilty to the offense charged in the indictment. A hearing was held to determine whether or not the proposed plea was voluntary. The following transpired in the interrogation by the trial judge:

"Q. All right, now, do you still want to stand by your plea of guilty?

A. Yes, sir. Can I say something?

Q. Yes, sir.

A. I'm not guilty really. Those people, I never come to them and said I want to sell you some marijuana. They called me and I turned them down and they kept doing it. Finally I sold it to them. You would have sold it, too.

Q. I doubt it. I never have. I will not accept this Defendant's plea on the basis of his statement he is not guilty. He has raised to me an indication of a defense. I have a new jury coming in here Monday. I am setting this case for trial at 8:00 o'clock Monday. There will be no plea bargaining from this day forward. If the jury turns him loose, that is their responsibility. If the jury finds him guilty, then it is my responsibility for me to pass sentence. Remove him from the Courtroom, Sheriff."

Subsequently, prior to trial, counsel for appellant moved the court to accept the appellant's plea of guilty, and, in support thereof, argued that the remarks made by appellant at the sentencing hearing were taken out of context, were made only for the purpose of mitigating sentence, and were not intended to deny his guilt of the crime charged. In overruling the motion, the trial judge indicated that, at said hearing, appellant gave answers causing him to believe appellant was offering defenses against the charge, and that he declined to accept the guilty plea for that reason.

In Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971), the United States Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant has no absolute right to have his guilty plea accepted by a trial court, and that the trial judge may decline to accept such a plea in the exercise of sound judicial discretion.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has decided that a trial judge should not reject guilty pleas without good reason, where they are freely and voluntarily entered, and that good reason for rejecting the pleas could exist when there was a possibility of a later collateral attack on the judgments entered pursuant to such guilty pleas. United States v. Martinez, 486 F.2d 15 (5th Cir. 1973). However, in North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970), the United States Supreme Court held it is not error for a trial court to accept a plea of guilty in spite of a defendant's unwillingness, or inability, to admit guilt where compelling reasons exist for entering the plea when there exists substantial evidence of the defendant's guilt.

In the case sub judice, appellant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Bennett v. State, No. 2003-DP-00765-SCT.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • May 11, 2006
    ...guilty plea accepted," and the court "may decline to accept such plea in the exercise of sound judicial discretion." Williamson v. State, 388 So.2d 168, 170 (Miss.1980) (citing Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 262, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971)); Moody v. State, 716 So.2d 592, 59......
  • Smith v. State
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • November 28, 1986
    ...463 (La.1982); State v. O'Donnell, 495 A.2d 798 (Me.1985); Commonwealth v. Coleman, 390 Mass. 797, 461 N.E.2d 157 (1984); Williamson v. State, 388 So.2d 168 (Miss.1980); State v. Jackson, 476 S.W.2d 540 (Mo.1972); State v. Baldwin, 629 P.2d 222 (Mont.1981); State v. Christensen, 213 Neb. 82......
  • People v. Devin, 53175
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • October 22, 1982
    ...misdeeds); Lottie v. State (1980), Ind., 406 N.E.2d 632; Commonwealth v. Franks (1977), 372 Mass. 866, 362 N.E.2d 895; Williamson v. State (Miss.1980), 388 So.2d 168; State v. Aby (1980), 205 Neb. 267, 287 N.W.2d 68; Lucas v. State (1980), 96 Nev. 428, 610 P.2d 727; State v. Marzolf (1979),......
  • Sayre v. State, 57110
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • October 26, 1988
    ...v. State, 507 So.2d 58, 62 n. 1 (Miss.1987) Daniels v. State, 422 So.2d at 291; Pace v. State, 407 So.2d 530 (Miss.1981); Williamson v. State, 388 So.2d 168 (Miss.1980); Landers v. State, 304 So.2d 641 (Miss.1974); Hamilton v. State, 295 So.2d 739 (Miss.1974); McCormick v. State, 279 So.2d ......
  • 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