People v. Dufford

California Court of Appeal Sep 19, 1958 No. Crim. No. 1387Published

Before: Mussell

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant personally entered a valid plea of guilty and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw that plea, as there was no clear and convincing evidence of overreaching.

Issues

Whether the defendant personally entered a valid plea of guilty to first-degree murder.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw her plea of guilty.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It clearly appears that appellant personally and through her counsel entered a plea of guilty to the crime of murder and that the degree of the offense was properly determined by the trial court.”

“The granting or denial of a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge and his decision will not be disturbed on review unless an abuse of that discretion is clearly shown.”

MUSSELL, J. Appellant was charged with the murder of LaVerne Elvis Dufford. She was arraigned and entered pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. Two doctors were appointed by the court to examine her and report at the time of trial. On April 21, 1958, the cause came on for trial. A jury was empaneled and after an opening statement by the prosecution, several exhibits were introduced in evidence and two doctors were examined. The trial was then recessed until the following day at 10 o’clock a.m., at which time a continuance was granted at the request of appellant until 1:30 p.m. ■ of that day, when the following took place in the trial court’s chambers:

“The Court: May it be stipulated that the defendant and her counsel, Mr. Muhleman, are here, and the Deputy District Attorney, Mr. Brown, and the matron and the clerk and the reporter and myself are in chambers ?

“Mb. Muhleman: So stipulated.

“Mr. Brown : So stipulated.

“The Clerk: Your true name is Thelma Fern Dufford?

“The Defendant: (Nods head affirmatively.)

“The Clerk: You are represented by Mr. Howard A. Muhleman ?

“The Defendant: (No response.)

“The Clerk: Mrs. Dufford, you have heretofore on March 4, 1958, in this Department, entered a plea of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity to one count of murder. At this time you wish to move the Court to withdraw those pleas and enter another plea?

“Mr. Muhleman: It is so moved by counsel.

“The Court: Do you wish to withdraw your plea of not guilty?

“Mr. Muhleman: Answer yes or no, Thelma.

“The Defendant: I can’t think clearly.

“Mr. Muhleman: Do you want to stand up? Maybe you will feel a little better. Do you wish to withdraw your plea . of not guilty at this time and enter a plea of guilty?

“The Court: Did you say yes or did you say no?

[675]“The Defendant: Yes.

People v. Dufford

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief