Summary
holding that appellant's claim that his plea was based on wrongful inducement by his attorney to enter the plea could not be heard for the first time on appeal because the basis for the challenge was not in the record
Summary of this case from State v. HudsonOpinion
No. 40965.
November 1, 1968.
Criminal law — plea of guilty — claimed voluntariness — postconviction procedure.
Appeal by LeRoy Tamminen from a judgment of the Anoka County District Court, Robert Bakke, Judge, whereby he was convicted of attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. Affirmed.
C. Paul Jones, State Public Defender, and Robert E. Oliphant, Assistant State Public Defender, for appellant.
Douglas M. Head, Attorney General, Richard H. Kyle, Solicitor General, Robert W. Johnson, County Attorney, and Gerard W. Snell, Assistant County Attorney, for respondent.
Heard before Knutson, C. J., and Nelson, Murphy, Peterson, and Frank T. Gallagher, JJ.
Defendant appeals from a judgment entered pursuant to a guilty plea on an information charging attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. He now claims that he was wrongfully induced to enter a plea of guilty because of fear that evidence obtained by an invalid search and seizure might be used against him in a trial, an illegally obtained confession, and statements of his counsel that he would receive a much more serious sentence if he were tried and found guilty.
As in State v. Gilles, 279 Minn. 363, 157 N.W.2d 64, the claims of the defendant are wholly devoid of any support in the record covering proceedings at the time of his entry of plea and sentencing. This is another case in which the defendant asserts errors which have never been presented to or considered by the trial court. The assertions made are a collateral attack upon the judgment which should be presented, if at all, at the trial-court level by petition for postconviction relief pursuant to the Post-conviction Remedy Act, L. 1967, c. 336, Minn. St. c. 590.
Affirmed.