State v. MartinezState v. Martinez
The defendant, Paul Martinez, was charged with simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling,
FACTS
The only facts available are those alleged in the bill of information and in a statement made by the defendant during the Boykin colloquy.
On June 3, 1984, the defendant broke into a residence on Trudeau Drive in Kenner. A female inhabitant of the residence surprised the defendant and held him at bay with a gun until the police arrived. The defendant was arrested and charged with simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling.
On appeal, the defendant assigns as error any and all errors patent on the face of the record.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
In an error patent review, the record is reviewed for any error that is discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings and proceedings and without inspection of the evidence. See
Where the conviction has been obtained by a plea of guilty, the issue of whether the defendant was properly “boykinized” also constitutes a proper inquiry in an “error patent” review. State v. Godejohn, 425 So.2d 750 (La.1983).
The trial judge also inquired into the merits of the allegations contained in the indictment and the details of the state‘s case. The defendant stated he had entered the “woman‘s house“.... and that she pulled a gun on him and called the police.
The trial judge further explained the sentence to be imposed and inquired if the defendant was satisfied with his appointed counsel. Throughout the entire ”Boykin” colloquy the defendant responded appropriately and expressed his willingness to waive his described rights and enter the guilty plea.
Therefore, after a complete review of the record, we find no errors patent.
The conviction (plea of guilty) and sentence are affirmed.
AFFIRMED.