Collins v. Hicks

Supreme Court of Georgia

Collins v. Hicks

198 S.E.2d 317, 230 Ga. 601, 1973 Ga. LEXIS 998

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMay 10, 1973

Docket27862

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 198 S.E.2d 317 (Collins v. Hicks) 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

Collins v. Hicks, 198 S.E.2d 317, 230 Ga. 601, 1973 Ga. LEXIS 998 (Ga. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Hawes, Justice.

In this petition for habeas corpus, the prisoner contended that his "guilty” plea to the charge of armed robbery was entered without effective and adequate representation of counsel. The transcript of the guilty plea hearing which was introduced as an exhibit by the respondent shows that in entering the plea he was represented by two competent attorneys who were present at the hearing, and who stated in their places that they had advised the accused of his constitutional rights. In addition thereto, the court, in the course of the guilty plea hearing, fully advised the accused of his constitutional rights and especially to his right to a trial by a jury. Under these circumstances, the habeas corpus court being the trior of the facts, was authorized to find that the accused in entering his plea was fully advised of his rights and that his plea was not entered as the result of inadequate of ineffective representation. The habeas corpus court did not err in remanding him to the custody of the warden.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Hawes, Justice.

In this petition for habeas corpus, the prisoner contended that his "guilty” plea to the charge of armed robbery was entered without effective and adequate representation of counsel. The transcript of the guilty plea hearing which was introduced as an exhibit by the respondent shows that in entering the plea he was represented by two competent attorneys who were present at the hearing, and who stated in their places that they had advised the accused of his constitutional rights. In addition thereto, the court, in the course of the guilty plea hearing, fully advised the accused of his constitutional rights and especially to his right to a trial by a jury. Under these circumstances, the habeas corpus court being the trior of the facts, was authorized to find that the accused in entering his plea was fully advised of his rights and that his plea was not entered as the result of inadequate of ineffective representation. The habeas corpus court did not err in remanding him to the custody of the warden.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 S.E.2d 317, 230 Ga. 601, 1973 Ga. LEXIS 998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-hicks-ga-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack