Ringo v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Ringo v. Commonwealth

391 S.W.2d 392, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 311

CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky

DecidedMay 28, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 391 S.W.2d 392 (Ringo v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ringo v. Commonwealth, 391 S.W.2d 392, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 311 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PALMORE, Judge.

This is an RCr 11.42 case in which the motion to vacate was overruled without a hearing. The only allegation which if proved would afford relief is that the mov-ant was denied the effective assistance of counsel in the original proceeding. It appears from the face of the record that he was first represented by employed counsel, who was released because the movant was unable to pay him. The court then appointed another attorney but the mov-ant did not want him, so the court discharged that attorney and appointed still another. At the trial the movant insisted on conducting his own defense, but the attorney last appointed remained with him and his services were available.

It is apparent from the record that the trial court leaned over backward to see that the movant had effective representation. But even if it were not, a general allegation of incompetent representation is not enough to justify a hearing. Before directing a hearing the trial court is entitled to know exactly in what respects the prisoner claims counsel failed to give him effective assistance, so that it can be determined from the face of the motion whether the facts intended to be proved amount to a constitutional violation. Cf. Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 386 S.W.2d 734 (1965).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PALMORE, Judge.

This is an RCr 11.42 case in which the motion to vacate was overruled without a hearing. The only allegation which if proved would afford relief is that the mov-ant was denied the effective assistance of counsel in the original proceeding. It appears from the face of the record that he was first represented by employed counsel, who was released because the movant was unable to pay him. The court then appointed another attorney but the mov-ant did not want him, so the court discharged that attorney and appointed still another. At the trial the movant insisted on conducting his own defense, but the attorney last appointed remained with him and his services were available.

It is apparent from the record that the trial court leaned over backward to see that the movant had effective representation. But even if it were not, a general allegation of incompetent representation is not enough to justify a hearing. Before directing a hearing the trial court is entitled to know exactly in what respects the prisoner claims counsel failed to give him effective assistance, so that it can be determined from the face of the motion whether the facts intended to be proved amount to a constitutional violation. Cf. Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 386 S.W.2d 734 (1965).

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

391 S.W.2d 392, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ringo-v-commonwealth-kyctapp-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack