Court Opinion

ID: 9742878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:22:06.92622+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:37.412466
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion
DeBruler, J.
I concur with the majority in the resolution of this issue on its merits. I do not, however, agree that appellant’s failure to file a Motion to Correct Errors is or should be fatal to this appeal.
Where an appellant has brought a direct appeal from a trial court’s overruling of his Verified Petition to Withdraw a Plea of Guilty, this Court has previously reached the merits of such appeals without the appellant having first filed a motion to correct errors. See Thacker v. State (1970), 254 Ind. 665, 262 N. E. 2d 189; Allman v. State (1968), Ind., 235 N. E. 2d 56.
In Dowling, et al. v. State (1954), 233 Ind. 426, 118 N. E. 2d 801, the appellants had sought a writ of error coram nobis. From an adverse ruling they appealed. Judge Bobbit writing for this Court said:
“The question presented by the petition for the writ might properly and should have been raised by the motion to withdraw their pleas of guilty. From an adverse ruling on this motion appellants could have appealed.” (Emphasis added.) 233 Ind. at 429.
*450In the case at bar the appellant presented a verified motion for leave to withdraw plea of guilty and vacate and set aside judgment of conviction. He also filed a memorandum in support of the motion. The State did not respond. The trial court relied on the intrinsic record made at the time the plea was entered in denying said motion. I see no value which would inure from requiring the appellant to re-submit the motion to withdraw and the memorandum is the form of a motion to correct errors before bringing this appeal.
Note. — Reported in 269 N. E. 2d 535.