From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Spellman

Supreme Court of Arizona
Jul 21, 1969
454 P.2d 980 (Ariz. 1969)

Opinion

No. 1857.

June 2, 1969. Rehearing Denied July 1, 1969. Opinion Supplemented July 21, 1969. See 104 Ariz. 597, 457 P.2d 274.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Maricopa County, Howard F. Thompson, J.

Vernon B. Croaff, Public Defender, by Grant Laney, Deputy Public Defender, for appellant.

Gary Nelson, Atty. Gen., by Carl Waag, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.


Defendant was charged with two counts of burglary, second degree, with a prior conviction, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to serve three to five years in the state penitentiary. He brings this appeal from the conviction.

Defendant is represented in this appeal by appointed counsel. However, he petitioned this Court in propria persona for an extension of time to file a supplemental brief. On October 8, 1968 we granted defendant 30 days to file the brief and on January 14, 1969 we extended that time another 60 days. No supplemental brief has been filed.

Defendant contends he was coerced by the county attorney into pleading guilty. The tool of coercion allegedly employed was a multiple count information and a promise by the prosecutor to dismiss some of the charges in exchange for a guilty plea to the others. In State v. Stewart, 103 Ariz. 457, 445 P.2d 433 (1968), we were faced with the same issue and ruled it was within the discretion of the prosecutor which charges he would prosecute. We stated in Stewart that "(i)n no case could we approve the filing of spurious charges against a defendant in order to coerce or `scare' him into pleading guilty to one of the charges." As in Stewart, the record here does not indicate that any spurious charges were brought against the defendant.

Defendant next contends that his judgment is invalid because the court did not determine for what crime he had a prior conviction and whether it was a felony. The argument has no merit. The record discloses that the information contained two addenda which stated defendant had been previously convicted of burglary, second degree, and robbery, second degree, both felonies.

Affirmed.

LOCKWOOD, V.C.J., and STRUCKMEYER, McFARLAND and HAYS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Spellman

Supreme Court of Arizona
Jul 21, 1969
454 P.2d 980 (Ariz. 1969)
Case details for

State v. Spellman

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Robert SPELLMAN, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of Arizona

Date published: Jul 21, 1969

Citations

454 P.2d 980 (Ariz. 1969)
454 P.2d 980

Citing Cases

State v. Spellman

UDALL, Chief Justice: In a motion for rehearing the public defender, on behalf of defendant Spellman, has…

State v. Jacobson

We agree with the State that whether or not to file an allegation of prior conviction is a matter left to the…