Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

SESSLER v. STATE OF INDIANA.

1. CRIMINAL LAW — Arraignment and Plea — Plea of Guilty — Withdrawal — Motion Filed After Term Too Late. — A petition to set aside a judgment entered on a plea of guilty or for permission to substitute a plea of not guilty filed after the term in which the judgment was entered is filed too late. p. 609.

2. CRIMINAL LAW — Coram Nobis — Conflicting Evidence — Decision Not Disturbed on Appeal. — Where the evidence, presented on a hearing of the issues presented by a petition for writ of error coram nobis, was conflicting on every material issue, the determination of the issue was within the discretion of the trial court and its conclusion as to the weight of the conflicting evidence cannot be disturbed on appeal. p. 609.

RICHMAN, J.

The appellant upon a plea of guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor was fined five dollars and costs which she paid and given a suspended sentence of six months in Indiana Woman's Prison. Over three months later and at a subsequent term she filed petition with affidavits attached to set aside the judgment and substitute a plea of not guilty for her former plea. The court granted a hearing at which affidavits and counteraffidavits were admitted and read in evidence and oral testimony was taken all of which is sought to be brought in the record by a bill of exceptions. All the evidence is abstracted in appellant's brief.

The petition filed after the term was too late. State ex rel. Thomas v. Murray, Judge (1942), 219 Ind. 461, 39 N.E.2d 450. If the petition be treated as a petition for writ 1, 2. of error coram nobis the same result must be reached. The evidence was conflicting on every material issue. The matter was within the trial court's discretion and his conclusion as to the weight of the conflicting evidence will not be disturbed. Garrett v. State (1939), 216 Ind. 52, 22 N.E.2d 981.

Judgment affirmed.

NOTE. — Reported in 56 N.E.2d 851.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SESSLER v. STATE
(Oct 9, 1944)