Meeks v. State

396 S.W.2d 306, 239 Ark. 1066, 1965 Ark. LEXIS 1143
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedDecember 6, 1965
Docket5149
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 396 S.W.2d 306 (Meeks v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Meeks v. State, 396 S.W.2d 306, 239 Ark. 1066, 1965 Ark. LEXIS 1143 (Ark. 1965).

Opinions

Sam Robinson, Associate Justice.

The appellant, Eugene Meeks, 19 years of age, pleaded guilty to the charge of burglary and was sentenced to six years in the penitentiary. About six weeks later he filed a motion to set aside the judgment, and that he be allowed to enter a plea of not guilty. The motion was overruled, and he has appealed to this court.

It appears that on July 29, 1964, a felony information was filed by the prosecuting attorney in the circuit court charging appellant with burglary. It further ap-pears that the burglary is alleged to have been committed on July 27; the appellant was arrested on that same day; on August 5 he pleaded guilty and was sentenced.

In his motion to set aside the judgment, appellant alleged that he is not guilty, but that he pleaded guilty because he was told by officials that it would be better for him to do so; that he would get less time than he would by standing trial. The officials deny that any such statement was made to appellant. The learned trial judge found as a fact, that in all probability appellant received a lesser sentence than he would if he had gone to trial on a plea of not guilty.

But be that as it may, we do not find any substantial distinction between this case and the case of Swagger v. State, 227 Ark. 45, 296 S. W. 204. There we said: “In most instances, since the decision in Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U. S. 458, 82 L. Ed. 1461, 58 S. Ct. 1019, 146 A. L. R. 357, the courts have held it to be error to permit a young, inexperienced person to plead guilty to a serious charge where he has no attorney.” The point is fully developed in Swagger, and that case is controlling here.

Reversed and Remanded.

Harris, C. J. & Ward & Johnson, J. J., dissent.

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

Related

Blake v. State
423 S.W.2d 544 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
396 S.W.2d 306, 239 Ark. 1066, 1965 Ark. LEXIS 1143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meeks-v-state-ark-1965.