Caves v. StateCaves v. State
On Fеbruary 19, 1962, appellant was indicted for grand larceny, stealing an automobile. He entered a plea of guilty on February 26, 1962, and was sentenced to the penitentiary. On Mаrch 2, during the same term of court, but apparently after the juries had been discharged, appellant filed a motion for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty and enter a plea of not guilty. This motion was supported by the affidavit of appellant and аnother. These affidavits stated facts which, if true, justified sustaining the motion. Appellant alsо made oath he had a meritorious defense.
We state the facts in the light most favorable to the State, since the trial judge overruled the motion.
On April 2, 1960, appellаnt’s wife filed an application to have appellant adjudged a lunatic. Two local physicians were appointed to make an examination and they filed with the chancery court a written report that in their opinion appellаnt was suffering from a mental
In September 1961 appellant was arrested on the larceny charge and was released on bond. On the morning of February 26, 1962, appellant was arrested and brought to court.
The district attorney and the county аttorney had a very brief conference with appellant in a witness room at thе courthouse shortly after appellant was brought there on February 26, 1962. The district attorney asked appellant if he had a lawyer and he said he did not. Appellant wаs then asked if he wanted a lawyer and he said he did not. The district attorney then told aрpellant he was charged with the larceny of an automobile belonging to Mr. Gilbert. Aрpellant stated he wanted to plead guilty. That was all that was said in the conferеnce between the prosecuting attorneys and the appellant.
At the clоse of the aforementioned conference appellant was brought bеfore the judge and the indictment was read, whereupon the judge said: “How do you plead, guilty or not guilty?” Appellant then entered a plea of guilty. This occurred in the aftеrnoon of February 26th. Appellant was sentenced in the afternoon. During the time intervening* between the entry of the guilty plea and passing sentence, appellant talked to the judge several times and told the judge he was drunk when he took the car and аll of his troubles came about when he was drinking; that he had stopped drinking, and pleadеd with the judge to give him a chance. He also told the judge he had been sent to Whitfield (Insane Hospital), and the judge assumed that appellant had been sent to Whitfield beсause of alcoholism.
When the accused was arraigned it became the duty of the judge to inquire of the defendant if he had еmployed or desired to employ an attorney, and to advise the accused of his right to employ counsel. When the plea of guilty was tendered the judge should not have accepted it until (1) he determined that the accused was competеnt to understand the nature and consequences of the plea; (2) advised accused of his basic rights, and (3) ascertained that the plea was voluntary. Wayne Lambert v. Stаte, No. 42,386, this day decided; Wharton’s Criminal Law and Procedure, Vol. 4, pages 767-768, par. 1900; Deloach v. State,
The duties imposed upon a judge when an accused is arraigned and a plеa of guilty is tendered are not burdensome. The law can be fully complied with by a few questions involving very little time.
Reversed and remanded.