(DOWNLOAD) "Dennis Guy Clark v. State Idaho" by Supreme Court of Idaho No. 10291 ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Dennis Guy Clark v. State Idaho
- Author : Supreme Court of Idaho No. 10291
- Release Date : January 17, 1969
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 62 KB
Description
Applicant (appellant) Dennis Guy Clark brought this action for post-conviction relief from a judgment in which he was found,
inter alia, to come within the status of persistent violator of the law. Appellant alleged by petition that in December, 1967,
in Minidoka County, he had pleaded not guilty to a charge of escape[Footnote 1] and of being a persistent violator of the
law.[Footnote 2] Subsequently Clark changed his plea to guilty of escape and admitted his status of being a persistent violator
of the law. He was then sentenced by the court to a term of imprisonment "not to exceed life." He further alleged that he
was represented by an attorney at the time of arraignment, at the time he admitted his prior convictions, and at the time
of sentencing. No claims are made by appellant that counsel was incompetent, that there was insufficient time to prepare a
defense, that the plea was in any manner involuntary, that he was unaware of the nature of the charges made against him, or
that he failed to understand the consequence of the plea of guilty and admitting he was a persistent violator. The only ground
for relief alleged by the application was that appellant should not have been found to be a persistent violator for the reason
that one of the former convictions pleaded in the information was invalid. The former conviction in question, also for the
crime of escape, was rendered in Cassia County in 1965. According to appellant he had been denied his right to a speedy trial
in the Cassia County proceedings. Parenthetically we observe that the application was prepared by petitioner. Counsel thereafter
was appointed, who could have amended the petition, had he and the applicant decided that the facts and the law necessitated
such revision. June 4, 1968, the prosecuting attorney moved to have the application dismissed. After a hearing, at which arguments on the
motion were heard but no evidence introduced and at which Clark was represented by counsel, the court issued an order granting
the motion to dismiss. The order, dated June 18, bore a handwritten notation that it would become final July 8. On July 8
a further order was entered making the June 18 order final.