DocketNumber: S11A1972
Citation Numbers: 290 Ga. 516, 722 S.E.2d 741, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 347, 2012 WL 375311, 2012 Ga. LEXIS 147
Judges: Benham
Filed Date: 2/6/2012
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Patrick Gibson, pro se, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion for out-of-time appeal. For reasons that follow, we affirm.
1. In 1984, appellant pled guilty to one count of murder in a negotiated plea deal in which the State agreed to withdraw its intent to seek the death penalty and allowed a second count for cocaine possession to be disposed as a nolle prosequi. In June 2011, appellant moved for an out-of-time appeal which the trial court denied on July 22, 2011. On appeal, appellant restates grounds made to the trial court, generally complaining that his plea was involuntary and the result of the ineffective assistance of his counsel. In particular, appellant complains that his indictment was defective for failing to charge a crime and that his attorneys should have known the indictment was defective. Appellant also alleges that the trial court did not have jurisdiction over his plea, that the murder did not take place in Georgia, that the notice of intent to seek the death penalty was not made prior to arraignment, that he was improperly denied a psychological exam to test his competency for trial, and that he was not arrested for murder and/or served with an arrest warrant.
Appellant cannot prevail on his motion for out-of-time appeal based on allegations that can be resolved against him based on facts in the record.
(a) When appellant entered his plea voluntarily, he waived the challenges to the circumstances of his arrest and/or the validity of the arrest warrant. See Moore v. State, supra, 285 Ga. at 858 (2).
(b) Appellant’s remaining allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be resolved solely by facts in the record, but would require a post-plea evidentiary hearing. Therefore, that allegation is not subject to review stemming from a motion for out-of-time appeal, but must be pursued in an action for habeas corpus. Id. at 858 (3); Marion v. State, 287 Ga. at 135 (3)-(5); Hodges v. State, 271 Ga. 466 (520 SE2d 689) (1999).
Judgment affirmed.
Here, the record consists of the pleadings and the plea hearing transcript. It does not include the attachments to appellant’s hriefs.
Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U. S. 238 (89 SC 1709, 23 LE2d 274) (1969).
Rule II (C) (1) of Georgia’s Unified Appeal Procedure of the Uniform Superior Court Rules, requiring notice of intent to seek the death penalty prior to arraignment, was not adopted until September 1, 1989, five years after appellant entered his plea.
Appellant’s concern about not receiving a psychological evaluation is also resolved against him because the record showed the request was withdrawn by appellant after it had been granted by the trial court.