From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Graves v. Maxwell, Warden

Supreme Court of Ohio
Mar 10, 1965
205 N.E.2d 399 (Ohio 1965)

Opinion

No. 39153

Decided March 10, 1965.

Habeas corpus — Claimed no representation by counsel — Coerced into confession — Waiver of indictment and plea of guilty — Right to relief by habeas corpus not shown.

IN HABEAS CORPUS.

This is an action in habeas corpus originating in this court. An information was filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County charging petitioner, Fred Graves, Jr., with armed robbery. On October 15, after signing a written waiver of indictment and a written waiver of one-day service, petitioner entered a plea of guilty.

Mr. Fred Graves, Jr., in propria persona. Mr. William B. Saxbe, attorney general, and Mr. William C. Baird, for respondent.


Petitioner, in this action, contends that his conviction was invalid because he was not represented by counsel. The record belies petitioner's contention. The waiver of prosecution by indictment recites that petitioner was represented by counsel and both waivers contain the signature of an attorney as attorney for defendant. Petitioner claims that he never saw this attorney. However, after the state presented evidence that he not only saw such attorney but that the attorney was present in court and explained to him the information procedure, the penalty for armed robbery and the fact that due to his prior record, which consisted of several prior felony convictions, petitioner could not hope for probation, petitioner then remembered talking to the attorney but claimed that he did not know that the attorney was representing him. There is no substance to petitioner's claim of lack of representation by counsel.

Next, petitioner contends that he was coerced into a confession. However, inasmuch as petitioner pleaded guilty, even if such confession existed it was not introduced into evidence and did not affect the validity of his subsequent plea of guilty. Caldwell v. Haskins, Supt., 176 Ohio St. 261.

Finally, petitioner urges that he was promised probation if he would plead guilty. The evidence introduced by the state showed that petitioner's attorney told him that he had no chance of probation. Even without such advice, however, it is inconceivable that petitioner, in view of his prior felony record, could believe there was any possibility of probation. The argument that a plea was induced by promises of probation can be urged on appeal, not in a habeas corpus proceeding. Click v. Eckle, Supt., 174 Ohio St. 88; and Kennedy v. Maxwell, Warden, 176 Ohio St. 215.

Petitioner remanded to custody.

TAFT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, HERBERT, SCHNEIDER and BROWN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Graves v. Maxwell, Warden

Supreme Court of Ohio
Mar 10, 1965
205 N.E.2d 399 (Ohio 1965)
Case details for

Graves v. Maxwell, Warden

Case Details

Full title:GRAVES v. MAXWELL, WARDEN

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Mar 10, 1965

Citations

205 N.E.2d 399 (Ohio 1965)
205 N.E.2d 399

Citing Cases

Williams v. Cassidy

The trial court entered a decree for the plaintiff. In so doing the court relied upon certain pronouncements…

Vigelius v. Vigelius

"Where a modified agreement has been fully executed, it will not be disturbed for a want of consideration. .…