Adams v. Balkcom

Supreme Court of Georgia

Adams v. Balkcom

128 S.E.2d 510, 218 Ga. 466, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 533

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedNovember 8, 1962

Docket21822

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 128 S.E.2d 510 (Adams v. Balkcom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. Balkcom, 128 S.E.2d 510, 218 Ga. 466, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 533 (Ga. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Head, Presiding Justice.

1. “A defendant by habeas corpus cannot review a judgment revoking a probationary sentence imposed upon him, since ‘habeas corpus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, writ of error, or other remedial pro[467]*467cedure for the correction of errors or irregularities alleged to have been committed by a trial court.’ Wallace v. Foster, 206 Ga. 561 (57 SE2d 920), and citations.” Balkcom v. Johnson, 211 Ga. 314 (2) (85 SE2d 762); Baker v. Dixon, 213 Ga. 709 (1) (100 SE2d 909).

Argued October 8, 1962 Decided November 8, 1962. Sumner & Boatright, for plaintiff in error. Eugene Cook, Attorney General, Earl L. Hickman, Assistant Attorney General, B. Daniel Dubberly, Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Walker P. Johnson, Jr., contra.

2. Where a defendant pleads guilty, a judge of a superior court has authority to impose sentence in a county of his circuit other than the county in which the crime was committed. Hall v. Matthews, 210 Ga. 401 (80 SE2d 167); Thompson v. Lynn, 215 Ga. 165 (109 SE2d 522).

3. A defendant in a criminal case may not accept the benefits of a probated sentence and thereafter, upon revocation of his probation, obtain his release by habeas corpus upon the ground that his original sentence was based upon a plea of guilty improperly entered. “A writ of habeas corpus can not be properly employed as a substitute for a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty improperly entered; . . .” Cummings v. Perry, 194 Ga. 424 (21 SE2d 847); Grammer v. Balkcom, 214 Ga. 691 (107 SE2d 213).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Head, Presiding Justice.

1. “A defendant by habeas corpus cannot review a judgment revoking a probationary sentence imposed upon him, since ‘habeas corpus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, writ of error, or other remedial pro[467]*467cedure for the correction of errors or irregularities alleged to have been committed by a trial court.’ Wallace v. Foster, 206 Ga. 561 (57 SE2d 920), and citations.” Balkcom v. Johnson, 211 Ga. 314 (2) (85 SE2d 762); Baker v. Dixon, 213 Ga. 709 (1) (100 SE2d 909).

Argued October 8, 1962 Decided November 8, 1962. Sumner & Boatright, for plaintiff in error. Eugene Cook, Attorney General, Earl L. Hickman, Assistant Attorney General, B. Daniel Dubberly, Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Walker P. Johnson, Jr., contra.

2. Where a defendant pleads guilty, a judge of a superior court has authority to impose sentence in a county of his circuit other than the county in which the crime was committed. Hall v. Matthews, 210 Ga. 401 (80 SE2d 167); Thompson v. Lynn, 215 Ga. 165 (109 SE2d 522).

3. A defendant in a criminal case may not accept the benefits of a probated sentence and thereafter, upon revocation of his probation, obtain his release by habeas corpus upon the ground that his original sentence was based upon a plea of guilty improperly entered. “A writ of habeas corpus can not be properly employed as a substitute for a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty improperly entered; . . .” Cummings v. Perry, 194 Ga. 424 (21 SE2d 847); Grammer v. Balkcom, 214 Ga. 691 (107 SE2d 213).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 S.E.2d 510, 218 Ga. 466, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-balkcom-ga-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack