Yates v. State, 43686
| Citation | 189 So.2d 917 |
| Decision Date | 13 September 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 43686,43686 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Parties | Phillip G. YATES v. STATE of Mississippi. |
R. Jess Brown, Alvin J. Bronstein, Richard Monk, Malcolm Farmer, III, Jackson, for appellant.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Phillip G. Yates was condemned to death for the murder of Jerry Gordon. While awaiting execution he filed in this Court an application for leave to file in the trial court a petition for writ of error coram nobis pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 1992.5 (1956).
The principal question for our decision is whether the application shows probable cause that Yates' plea of guilty should be set aside on the ground that an extra-judicial confession was not voluntary. We hold that the records of the two trials show coculsively that Yates was competent and pleaded guilty after being fully and competently advised of his rights, and judicially confessed by taking the stand and affirming the voluntariness of his plea of guilty and reaffirming his previous extra-judicial confession. The verdict of the jury condemning him to death should not be vacated, and leave to file the petition for writ of error coram nobis is denied.
Yates was indicted for under, a capital offense, and the trial judge appointed counsel to defend him. Upon arraignment, he was represented by his counsel and entered a plea of guilty. The trial judge cautioned the defendant as to the consequences of his plea and that a jury would be impanelled to determine whether the punishment would be death or life imprisonment. His attorney informed the court that he had counselled with the defendant as to the consequences of his plea, the procedure following a plea of guilty, and the dangers of such a plea. The trial judge stated to the defendant from the benth the effect of a plea of guilty and the court's desire to see that his plea was free and voluntary. The court inquired if the defendant understood his explanation, and the defendant stated that he did. The defendant stated that he was twenty-one years old, that he had finished the eleventh grade in school, and insisted that he still desired to enter a guilty plea. Yates stated that he understood the consequences of his plea and there was no doubt in his mind about his desire to plead guilty. After making careful inquiry concerning the circumstances of Yates' plea and being assured that Yates had competent advice from his counsel, the trial judge found that the defendant understood his plea and that it was free and voluntary. The plea was then accepted and a special venire was drawn in the presence of Yates and his counsel. The court sustained a motion for examination of the defendant by a psychiatrist. After receiving the report of the psychiatrist that Yates was without psychosis and was competent to aid and assist his counsel, the trial proceeded before a jury selected from the special venire. The sole issue was whether Yates would suffer the death penalty or be imprisoned for life. Considerable testimony was heard, including the confession of the accused, which was received without objection. Yates then took the stand and fully confessed the crime with which he was charged and gave the reasons why he wrote a confession in his own handwriting, and later signed a typewritten confession. He stated that he had freely and voluntarily confessed without any threat or promise and that 'every word of it (confession) is true.'
The jury returned a verdict determining that death should be the penalty.
Upon appeal to this Court we held that the trial court did not err in accepting the plea of guilty and in submitting to the jury the question of punishment. The Court held that the denial of a motion for continuance was reversible error. The case was reversed so that defendant could secure and use in his trial the defendant's service record while in the United States Air Force, including psychiatric examinations, which he contended might have resulted in a different verdict, had it been presented to the jury. Yates v. State, 251 Miss. 376, 169 So.2d 792 (1964).
Upon remand for retrial, Yates' counsel stated to the court that after discussing the matter at great length with the defendant and his parents, the defendant and his parents desired (1) that his plea should remain a plea of guilty and (2) that no change of venue was desired. He also stated that counsel had discussed the matter of Yates' sanity with the staff of the Mississippi State (Insane) Hospital at Whitfield, who made a five-week examination of defendant at the state hospital and that Yates was diagnosed as being without psychosis. Counsel also stated to the court that he had discussed the matter of pleading insanity with the defendant and with defendant's parents, and defendant and his parents did not desire to plead insanity. The lengthy report of the state hospital staff was introduced in the record. In this connection, counsel stated that all medical records of the United States Air Force concerning the defendant were made available to the staff of the Mississippi State Hospital at Whitfield, and the Air Force reports were devoid of any medical evidence of the defendant having any psychosis and that he had never been diagnosed as being psychotic. Photostatic copies of Yates' medical record in the Air Force were introduced and appeared in the record of the second trial.
The record of the second trial was much shorter than the first. The confession was again introduced, and the sheriff told of Yates showing him where to find the body of the deceased in a remote wood. Yates again took the stand, and in response to questions by his counsel, again confessed, telling how well he had been treated by everyone following his arrest, and that he confessed because of his family and his desire to clear his conscience. He fully and completely related in open court the details of the crime. The jury again meted out the death penalty, and Yates again appealed to this Court. We affirmed. Yates v. State, 253 Miss. 424, 175 So.2d 617 (1965).
Yates' application for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was denied November 22, 1965, and this Court appointed a new date for execution of the death sentence. A petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi. The Honorable Claude F. Clayton, Judge of that court, stayed execution, held a hearing, and on June 24, 1966, entered on order staying proceeding in the United States District Court for a period of four months in order that Yates might pursue his post-conviction remedies in the state courts. The application for leave to file a petition in the trial court for a writ of error coram nobis, now before this Court, followed.
When application is made to this Court for leave to file in the trial court a petition for writ of error coram nobis, leave is usually granted if the application and the proposed petition state sufficient facts to show probable cause for the issuance of the writ. Robers v. State, 241 Miss. 593, 130 So.2d 856 (1961). In the case now before us we consider the allegations of the application along with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Foster v. State
...is "sufficient to show probable cause" for the relief requested. Rogers v. State, 241 Miss. 593, 130 So.2d 856 (1961); 2 Yates v. State, 189 So.2d 917 (Miss.1966). We have granted leave where there was doubt concerning its viability. Thompson v. State, 188 So.2d 239 (Miss.1966). A grant of ......
-
Sanders v. State, 54210
...conviction upon trial by jury will generally not be sufficient to entitle a petitioner to relief in cases such as this. Yates v. State, 189 So.2d 917 (Miss.1966). Likewise, the generalized prediction of defense counsel that a lesser sentence is likely upon a plea of guilty is in and of itse......
-
Myers v. State
...conviction upon trial by jury will generally not be sufficient to entitle a petitioner to relief in cases such as this. Yates v. State, 189 So.2d 917 (Miss.1966). Sanders, 440 So.2d at 287. The relevant distinction is between a "generalized prediction" and a "firm representation" of such le......
-
Gardner v. State, 57925
...be received may render a guilty plea involuntary, but "mere expectation or hope" is not sufficient. Sanders at 280, 287. Yates v. State, 189 So.2d 917 (Miss.1966). Here, as in Sanders, the thoroughness with which Gardner was interrogated by the lower court at the time his plea was tendered ......