Opinion ID: 2240253
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Records of Prior Convictions

Text: Counsel for Paul moved to dismiss the habitual offender charge on the grounds that no transcript existed of the guilty plea hearings which resulted in two of the three prior felony convictions alleged. She contended that the absence of a record of the two proceedings alone made those convictions facially invalid and therefore susceptible to attack during the habitual offender proceedings. She further contended that the lack of a record for a facially invalid conviction denied Paul an effective opportunity to challenge its constitutionality. The trial court denied the motion to dismiss, and the prosecution introduced several documents and witnesses substantiating its claim that Paul had three prior felony convictions. The mere absence of a record does not always require the vacation of a guilty plea. Zimmerman v. State (1982), Ind., 436 N.E.2d 1087. Moreover, to sustain a collateral attack on the underlying felonies alleged in an habitual offender proceeding, an appellant must demonstrate that the documents used to prove the convictions, on their face, raise a presumption that the convictions were constitutionally infirm. Edwards v. State (1985), Ind. 479 N.E.2d 541. A claim that the transcript is non-existent does not suffice for this purpose, and Paul has not included in the record any of the documents used to prove the convictions. The trial court properly denied the motion.