Champion v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Champion v. State

219 So. 2d 416, 44 Ala. App. 660, 1969 Ala. App. LEXIS 381

Alabama Court of Appeals·Decided February 18, 1969·No. 6 Div. 424·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

CATES, Judge.

This appeal from denial of coram nobis raises only a question of fact.

The fact at issue is whether or not Champion voluntarily pleaded guilty to a grand larceny indictment for which he got a sentence of one year and a day.

He testified but brought out nothing to show that he could have probably maintained a not guilty plea. Champion’s fear seems to have been that he could get up to ten years in prison. His former attorney [661]*661was called by the State and testified that he did not coerce Champion into pleading guilty.

Under Code 1940, T. 13, § 66 (third sentence), we close this opinion. Since the burden of persuasion was on •appellant, the judgment of the trial court is due to be

Affirmed.

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

CATES, Judge.

This appeal from denial of coram nobis raises only a question of fact.

The fact at issue is whether or not Champion voluntarily pleaded guilty to a grand larceny indictment for which he got a sentence of one year and a day.

He testified but brought out nothing to show that he could have probably maintained a not guilty plea. Champion’s fear seems to have been that he could get up to ten years in prison. His former attorney [661]*661was called by the State and testified that he did not coerce Champion into pleading guilty.

Under Code 1940, T. 13, § 66 (third sentence), we close this opinion. Since the burden of persuasion was on •appellant, the judgment of the trial court is due to be

Affirmed.

Champion v. State, 219 So. 2d 416, 44 Ala. App. 660, 1969 Ala. App. LEXIS 381 (Ala. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

219 So. 2d 416 (Champion v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related