Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

247 Ind. 257

202 N.E.2d 273

Griffith v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 23, 1964

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1964-11-23

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1969

3 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““However, from petitioner’s petition and other papers filed, it appears that on or about June 3, 1964, petitioner was paroled and is therefore no longer an inmate, pauper or otherwise, of any penal institution of the State. It further appears from said papers that petitioner has voluntarily absented himself from the State of Indiana and the jurisdiction of this Court and that he is presently residing at 821 Fourth Street, in the city of Madison, State of Illinois. “As this Court’s jurisdiction is limited by the territorial boundaries of the State of Indiana and this Court has no authority to appoint counsel to perform duties outside the State of Indiana, the petition for appointment of counsel is now denied.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including In re Baxter for Appointment of Counsel

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1964-11-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Petitioner has filed motion for appointment of counsel in this Court to represent him in reviewing the action of the St. Joseph Superior Court, No. 1, growing out of his conviction after a jury trial in such court of the crime of grand larceny for which he was sentenced for a period of one to ten years.

¶2*258■However, from petitioner’s petition and other papers filed, it appears that on or about June 3, 1964, petitioner was paroled and is therefore no longer an inmate, pauper or otherwise, of any penal institution of the State. It further appears from said papers that petitioner has voluntarily absented himself from the State of Indiana and the jurisdiction of this Court and that he is presently residing at 821 Fourth Street, in the city of Madison, State of Illinois.

¶3As this Court’s jurisdiction is limited by the territorial boundaries of the State of Indiana and this Court has no authority to appoint counsel to perform duties outside the State of Indiana, the petition for appointment of counsel is now denied.

¶4Achor, J., dissents without opinion.

/247/ind/257 · .json · Public domain