Case ID: so2d_346/html/1106-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SUMMERS, J., TATE and MARCUS, JJ. DIXON, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Louisiana v. Lonnie G. RAYBON.
    No. 59954.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 10, 1977.
   In re: Lonnie G. Raybon applying for writ of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition and review.

Writ refused. On the circumstances shown, relator is not entitled to the relief sought.

SUMMERS, J.,

concurs in denial. In my view it is implicit from this record that at the time of the guilty plea applicant was aware of the consequences of his plea and that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily made. The law requires no more.

TATE and MARCUS, JJ.

We are not convinced that the trial court erred in the holding, on the basis of the evidentiary hearing, that the record establishes that the state bore its burden of proving an intelligent and knowing plea of guilty. Nevertheless, we feel that the present protracted post-conviction proceeding supports reiteration of the principal that the preferred procedure under the present circumstances is for the trial court to ascertain independently at the time of the plea that the accused is aware of the rights he relinquishes by his plea and of the consequences thereof.

DIXON, J.,

dissents from the denial. The record establishes that neither the judge nor the lawyer informed applicant of the rights he waived by pleading guilty, and the record does not establish that applicant knew he could demand a trial. The record does establish that he steadfastly maintained his innocence, and does not establish that he knew the minimum sentence was a jail term.

CALOGERO, J., is of the opinion the writ should be granted.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.