Court Opinion

ID: 9939055
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 19:05:18.734369+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:37:51.548373
License: Public Domain

Robbery: sentence, life imprisonment.
Spidell changed his plea from not guilty to guilty.1 The Court reporter set out the colloquy between the bench and the prisoner. Mainly it comports with Boykin v. Alabama,395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, except that no mention was made of the minimum and maximum possible sentences. See Question No. 19, "Questions to be Asked of Defendants at Arraignment on Guilty Pleas in Felony Cases" by Hon. F. Murland Smith at 1970 Circuit Judges Summer Seminar. C.L.E. program, Alabama State Bar, July 16, 1970.
Such an enquiry is important to a record which speaks for itself as to the understanding of a defendant who pleads guilty.
We consider it necessary to remand to the lower court to ascertain if either counsel or court had beforehand told Spidell of the range of punishment.2
Remanded with directions.
PRICE, P. J., and ALMON, J., concur.
1 No jury was impaneled. See Act No. 1061, September 12, 1969.
2 Footnote 7 in Boykin v. Alabama, supra, quotes from Commonwealth ex rel. West v. Rundle, 428 Pa. 102, 237 A.2d 196, wherein trial courts are adjured to conduct on the recordexaminations of defendants who want to plead guilty. There it is said the examinations should include, among other things, the permissible range of sentences.
See also Beal v. Henderson, D.C., 317 F. Supp. 1323; Anno. 97 A.L.R.2d 549.
 AFTER REMANDMENT HEARING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT