Preview:

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. APPELLANT PRO SE: DWIGHT WAYNE JEFFERS Pendleton, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General Of Indiana GEORGE P. SHERMAN Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
DWIGHT WAYNE JEFFERS, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 48A04-0608-PC-421

APPEAL FROM THE MADISON SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Thomas G. Wright, Special Judge Cause No. 48D03-8711-CF-150

September 18, 2007

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

ROBB, Judge

Case Summary and Issue Dwight Wayne Jeffers entered a plea of guilty to murder and attempted murder in 1988. Jeffers subsequently sought post-conviction relief from his conviction of attempted murder, claiming that his plea was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered because he was not advised that specific intent to kill is an element of attempted murder. He now appeals the post-conviction court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, raising the following issue for our review: whether his plea of guilty violates due process because he was not aware that specific intent to kill the victim was a critical element of the offense. Concluding that the post-conviction court did not err in determining that Jeffers was aware of the critical elements of the crime to which he was pleading guilty, we affirm. Facts and Procedural History The facts and procedural history leading up to Jeffers's conviction, as stated in Jeffers's direct appeal to this court, are as follows: Jeffers bound and gagged his ex-girlfriend in her garage, then strangled her to death. Also, he tried to strangle her daughter in her bedroom, but was unsuccessful. However, she suffered injuries to her neck, face and shoulder areas. Jeffers was arrested and charged with murder, attempted murder, and criminal confinement. The prosecutor and Jeffers's counsel negotiated and reached an oral plea agreement wherein Jeffers would plead guilty to murder and attempted murder and the State would dismiss Count III, criminal confinement. At arraignment, the court below thoroughly advised Jeffers of his rights and the waiver of certain rights if he entered guilty pleas. After his advisement by the court, Jeffers pleaded guilty to murder and attempted murder and the State dismissed the criminal confinement count. Later, at his sentencing hearing however, Jeffers orally moved the court to withdraw his earlier guilty pleas as to both charges. After hearing testimony, the trial court denied Jeffers's motion and sentenced him to 40 years for 2

murder, 30 years for attempted murder, then ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. Jeffers v. State, No. 48A04-8902-CR-58, slip op. at 2-3 (Ind. Ct. App., July 12, 1989), trans. denied. Jeffers appealed, contending that the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea and in sentencing him. We affirmed both Jeffers's convictions and his sentence. Id. at 5, 7. In 1990, Jeffers filed, pro se, a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his plea was not entered intelligently and voluntarily and also that his trial counsel was ineffective. After the State responded to Jeffers's petition in December 1990, no further pleadings were filed and no further proceedings were held until June 2005, when Jeffers amended his petition. 1 A hearing was held in June 2006, at which time Jeffers stated: I'm alleging that my plea of guilty to attempted murder was not knowingly [sic], voluntary, or intentional because I was not advised that the specific intent to kill is a critical element of attempted murder.

He also contended that the State's defense of laches was not applicable because this issue could be decided on review of the record and indicated his intention to rely solely on the record of his guilty plea hearing. The post-conviction court entered findings and conclusions denying Jeffers's petition:

I. FINDINGS BY THE COURT

In November 1990, the Indiana State Public Defender entered an appearance on Jeffers's behalf. The Public Defender did not file any pleadings or appear in any proceedings on Jeffers's behalf and withdrew

1

3

A. On November 12, 1987, [Jeffers] appeared in open Court, before the Honorable Thomas [Newman] and at such time was "duly advised of his rights hereunder, and informed of the charges against him, and being given a copy of said charges . . . ." The Court entered a plea of not guilty for [Jeffers]. B. Count II, Attempted Murder states that "SAMUEL E. HANNA, being duly sworn upon his oath, further says that: On or about the 10th day of November, 1987, in Madison County, State of Indiana, DWIGHT W. JEFFERS, did attempt to commit the crime of murder by knowingly trying to strangle one Melissa D. Archer, by placing a length of telephone cord around the throat of Melissa D. Archer, and with the intent to kill Melissa D. Archer, which conduct constituted a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of murder. ALL OF WHICH IS CONTRARY to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, to-wit: I.C. 35-41-5-1 and I.C. 35-42-1-1, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Indiana.["] C. On August 1, 1987, [Jeffers] appeared before the Court for the purpose of entering pleas of guilty to Count I, Murder, and Count II, Attempted Murder, and was informed by the Court "that pleading guilty, you are admitting the truth of the allegations as brought forth by the State of Indiana and that we will proceed with judgment of conviction and sentence you without a trial. Do you understand that? Answer. Yes.["] D. Subsequently, [Jeffers], after a summary of facts of the crimes was presented by the State, entered a plea of guilty to Count II, attempted murder. II. CONCLUSIONS BY THE COURT A. The Court finds that [Jeffers], during the proceedings, was informed by the Court of the elements of the crime of attempted murder, i.e. that he did the alleged acts with the "intent to kill" Melissa D. Archer. B. The Court finds that [Jeffers's] plea of guilty to Attempted Murder was knowingly and voluntarily made and had a factual basis therefore. C. The Court finds that the finding of [Jeffers] guilty of the crime of attempted murder as charged and entry of conviction thereon by the Court did not violated [sic] the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment[s] to the United States Constitution nor Article One Section 12 of the Indiana Constitution or the laws of the State of Indiana. Appellant's Appendix at 447-48. Jeffers now appeals.

its appearance in July 1997. In 1994, the trial judge recused himself from the case and a new judge qualified and assumed jurisdiction later that year.

4

Discussion and Decision I. Standard of Review A defendant who has exhausted the direct appeal process may challenge the correctness of his conviction and sentence by filing a petition for post-conviction relief. Specht v. State, 838 N.E.2d 1081, 1086 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), trans. denied. Post-conviction procedures create a narrow remedy for subsequent collateral challenges to convictions. Id. "[C]omplaints that something went awry at trial are generally cognizable only when they show deprivation of the right to effective assistance of counsel or issues demonstrably unavailable at the time of trial or direct appeal." Sanders v. State, 765 N.E.2d 591, 592 (Ind. 2002). Pursuant to the rules of post-conviction relief, the petitioner must establish the grounds for relief by a preponderance of the evidence. See Ind. Post-Conviction Rule 1,

Download Dwight Wayne Jeffers v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law