14 N.E.3d 80
Ind. Ct. App.2014Background
- In 1993 Collins was arrested after fleeing in a stolen vehicle; he pleaded guilty in 1994 to resisting law enforcement (Class D felony) in exchange for dismissal of other charges and an agreed sentence (18 months, 15 suspended).
- Collins, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for post-conviction relief in 2008 raising claims about counsel, voluntariness of the plea, and sentencing legality.
- Collins alleged his trial counsel at the plea hearing was Paul Hartman, a certified legal intern (law student), and that Hartman failed to advise him of alternatives (AMS), allowed an unlawful sentence, and failed to advise a defense.
- At evidentiary hearings Hartman (now an attorney) testified he disclosed his intern status, was supervised by a licensed attorney, and had discussed AMS with Collins; the post-conviction court credited Hartman’s testimony.
- The post-conviction court denied Collins’s subpoenas for three witnesses (prosecutor, supervising public defender who lived in Florida, and the trial judge) and denied relief; Collins appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Collins) | Defendant's Argument (State / Trial Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of subpoenas | Court should have issued subpoenas for Hartman’s supervisor, prosecutor, and judge to support Collins’s claims | Trial court properly exercised discretion; subpoenas not shown to be reasonably likely to produce relevant, probative testimony and one witness was out-of-state | Affirmed: no abuse of discretion in refusing subpoenas |
| Right to counsel | Collins was denied counsel because he was represented by a law student (Hartman) at plea | Certified legal interns are authorized to practice under supervision; Hartman disclosed status and was supervised | Affirmed: no deprivation of Sixth Amendment assistance of counsel |
| Plea knowing/voluntary (AMS & illegal sentence) | Collins was unaware of AMS and thus plea unknowing; plea required an illegal suspended sentence given juvenile adjudication | Record shows AMS was discussed and noted at plea; statutory exception allowed suspension given stipulated circumstances unlikely to recur | Affirmed: plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel failed to advise re: AMS, allowed illegal/overly lenient sentence, and failed to advise a defense (he was beaten, not resisting) | Credited testimony shows counsel discussed AMS and supervision; statutory exception made suspension lawful; Collins admitted guilt under oath and court found his denial not credible | Affirmed: no ineffective assistance under Strickland/Hill (no deficient performance or prejudice) |
Key Cases Cited
- Stevens v. State, 770 N.E.2d 739 (Ind. 2002) (standard of review for negative post-conviction judgments)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Ineffective assistance two-part test)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (applying Strickland to guilty-plea prejudice inquiry)
- Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (right to counsel at critical stages, including plea)
- Butler v. State, 658 N.E.2d 72 (trial-court determinations during plea carry presumption of correctness)
- United States v. Chapa, 602 F.3d 865 (guilty-plea colloquy representations carry presumption of correctness)