(Download) "State Missouri v. Arthur Burrington" by Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2 # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State Missouri v. Arthur Burrington
- Author : Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2
- Release Date : January 14, 1963
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 60 KB
Description
On April 22, 1941, Arthur Burrington was convicted of robbery in the first degree and sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment.
On August 1, 1962, under rule 27.26, he filed a motion to vacate the sentence and judgment alleging as grounds that in his
April 1941 trial his constitutional rights had been infringed in two respects: (1) that he was denied the "effective assistance
of counsel" in that his court appointed attorney, also one of his lawyers in this proceeding, was appointed to represent him
on April 19, 1941, that "knowledge of such appointment did not come to said attorney until 9:00 a.m. April 21, 1941" after
the case was set for trial and "said attorney was allowed only until April 22, 1941, the following day, to prepare for trial"
and (2) that the information upon which he was tried and convicted was insufficient to charge the offense of robbery in the
first degree in that it "failed to charge that the offense was committed either by violence to the person of the person robbed,
or by putting the person robbed in fear of some immediate injury to his person." Upon these allegations under this proceeding
to vacate the judgment there was a hearing before the Circuit Court of Jasper County, the county in which Burrington was tried
in 1941, he was represented by counsel procured by him, a supporting deposition from a witness in Alaska was filed and at
the Conclusion of the hearing "by consent the said motion is taken up, and after being seen, heard and fully understood by
the court the same is overruled." There is however an insuperable obstacle to this court's consideration of either of these claims. Appellant's counsel does
not claim that either of these matters is shown or demonstrable upon the transcript filed in this court. On the contrary,
appellant's brief says "before proceeding with Statement of Facts, Points and Authorities, * * * Counsel respectfully begs
leave to point out to the Court certain points in which the Transcript differs in material matters from what Counsel's file
shows and Counsel's understanding of the material facts; keeping in mind that this brief is being written a distance of some
200 miles or more from Joplin, where the trial involved took place, and without access to the original file in the office
of the Circuit Clerk of Jasper County." Counsel then attaches to their brief two papers designated as "Exhibit A" and "Exhibit
B" and "(appellant) prays this Court to consider the foregoing matters, in connection with the Exhibits attached to this Brief,
and to make such order correcting said errors as this Court shall deem proper." The insuperable obstacle to all these claims
and this court's consideration of them is that after the hearing of the motion and after the entry of the indicated judgment,
and after the appellant was allowed to appeal as a poor person, the official court reporter prepared a certified transcript
and on March 13, 1963, that transcript was formally approved by the prosecuting attorney of Jasper County and by appellant's
counsel and was duly filed in this court on March 15, 1963. There is then on file in this court an official transcript agreed
to by the parties, and there was no attempt to have it corrected and approved by the trial court. Sup. Ct. Rule 82.12(c).
 "State Missouri v. Arthur Burrington" by Supreme Court of Missouri Division 2 # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}