Barker v. State

175 N.E.2d 353, 242 Ind. 5, 1961 Ind. LEXIS 199
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedJune 13, 1961
Docket30,083
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 175 N.E.2d 353 (Barker v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barker v. State, 175 N.E.2d 353, 242 Ind. 5, 1961 Ind. LEXIS 199 (Ind. 1961).

Opinion

Achor, J.

This is an original action in which petitioner asks permission to file a belated appeal.

This court has heretofore held that in order to sustain a motion for a belated appeal, the following essential elements must be made to appear: One. There must be cause shown to excuse the delay in perfecting a timely appeal and, two, that he has a prima facie meritorious cause for appeal. State ex rel. Casey v. Murray (1952), 281 Ind. 74, 77, 106 N. E. 2d 911.

In this case the attorney for petitioner, as excuse for his failure to perfect a timely appeal, asserts that he was engrossed with other matters of business and that he honestly believes that the motion for new trial was overruled by the *7 trial court on a date subsequent to the date of actual ruling thereon. The mere misunderstanding of counsel as to the law or the facts regarding the time available for appeal is not sufficient cause for granting a belated appeal. See cases cited in Flanagan, Wiltrout & Hamilton’s Indiana Trial and Appellate Practice §2475, p. 20, Comment 2.

Furthermore, in this petition the appellant sets forth no facts with regard to the merits of an appeal except to state: “Your affiant petitioner respectfully says that the evidence in the record discloses that the appellant is not guilty of murder in the second degree and . . . that the motion, for new trial embraces all those grounds in which appellant contends that he was not guilty of the crime . . .” This general allegation on the part of appellant which contains no specific reference to or citation of error in the record is insufficient to make a prima facie showing of merit which is essential to the granting of a belated appeal.

The petition is therefore denied.

Landis, C. J., Arterburn, Bobbitt, Jackson, JJ., concur.

Note. — Reported in 175 N. E. 2d 353.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Foy
862 N.E.2d 1219 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2007)
Eggers v. Wright
245 N.E.2d 331 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1969)
Davidson v. State
220 N.E.2d 814 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1966)
Newland v. State
220 N.E.2d 341 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1966)
Martin v. State
215 N.E.2d 189 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1966)
Johnson v. State
215 N.E.2d 38 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1966)
Victor v. State
214 N.E.2d 645 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
175 N.E.2d 353, 242 Ind. 5, 1961 Ind. LEXIS 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barker-v-state-ind-1961.