Hollis v. Ault
Hollis v. Ault
Opinion of the Court
In this case the appellant was initially found guilty by a jury of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. That conviction was appealed, reversed, and a new trial was granted. The appellant then entered a plea of guilty to voluntary
In his order denying the motion the trial court stated that the court had "knowledge that defendant freely and voluntarily entered his plea of guilty in the presence of his own attorney and with his concurrence and assistance.”
On August 6, 1971, the appellant petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus making the same contentions as had been contained in his previously denied motion plus a new contention, not theretofore mentioned by him, that he was under the influence of heroin at the time he entered his plea of guilty.
The habeas corpus court, after a full hearing, found that the appellant was not under the influence of intoxicants or liquors or narcotics at the time he entered his plea, and that he did freely and voluntarily enter his plea of guilty.
We have reviewed the entire record, and we affirm the habeas corpus court’s judgment remanding the appellant to the custody of the warden.
The transcript of the proceedings in the trial court at the time the appellant entered his plea of guilty, with his counsel present, shows that the trial judge who accepted the guilty plea fully discharged his duty "in canvassing the matter with the accused to make sure he has a full understanding of what the plea connotes, and of its consequence.” Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U. S. 238, 244 (89 SC 1709, 23 LE2d 274).
We are convinced that the appellant has received every benefit allowed him by law for his own personal protection in this situation, and that his plea was legally entered, freely and voluntarily made by him, and properly accepted.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.