Jordan v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Jordan v. State

1967 OK CR 63, 426 P.2d 381, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 274

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 12, 1967

DocketNo. A-14163

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1967 OK CR 63 (Jordan v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jordan v. State, 1967 OK CR 63, 426 P.2d 381, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 274 (Okla. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

NIX, Presiding Judge:

This is an original proceeding for Post-Conviction Appeal filed by the petitioner, Herman Jordan #74305, alleging his plea of guilty was not entered voluntarily, that he was not represented by counsel at arraignment, and that he was not advised of his right to appeal.

Attached to the response filed by the Attorney General are the District Court of Washington County records, and a transcript of the proceedings of which petitioner complains.

From this record now before the Court, it is clear that petitioner’s allegation is unfounded, and we will not recite said record here.

Where the record affirmatively shows that an accused knew and understood his right to counsel and competently and intelligently waived this right and entered a plea of guilty, with full knowledge of the consequences of such plea, the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States making obligatory the provisions of the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States upon the states, have been fully complied with, and application for post-conviction appeal or habeas corpus will be denied.

BUSSEY, J., and TOM BRETT, J., concur.

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

NIX, Presiding Judge:

This is an original proceeding for Post-Conviction Appeal filed by the petitioner, Herman Jordan #74305, alleging his plea of guilty was not entered voluntarily, that he was not represented by counsel at arraignment, and that he was not advised of his right to appeal.

Attached to the response filed by the Attorney General are the District Court of Washington County records, and a transcript of the proceedings of which petitioner complains.

From this record now before the Court, it is clear that petitioner’s allegation is unfounded, and we will not recite said record here.

Where the record affirmatively shows that an accused knew and understood his right to counsel and competently and intelligently waived this right and entered a plea of guilty, with full knowledge of the consequences of such plea, the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States making obligatory the provisions of the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States upon the states, have been fully complied with, and application for post-conviction appeal or habeas corpus will be denied.

BUSSEY, J., and TOM BRETT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1967 OK CR 63, 426 P.2d 381, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jordan-v-state-oklacrimapp-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack