Dean v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Dean v. State

372 S.E.2d 286, 188 Ga. App. 128, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 875

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 14, 1988

Docket76432

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 372 S.E.2d 286 (Dean v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dean v. State, 372 S.E.2d 286, 188 Ga. App. 128, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 875 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

*128 Carley, Judge.

Appellant was indicted for the misdemeanor offense of hindering a police officer in violation of former OCGA § 16-10-24. Appellant’s first trial ended in a mistrial when the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Appellant was retried and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The trial court denied appellant’s motion for new trial. Appellant now appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion for new trial and from the judgment of conviction and sentence which were entered on the guilty verdict.

1. Several of appellant’s enumerations of error relate to the conduct of the trial. However, the trial was not reported, and, consequently, there is no transcript of the trial. See OCGA § 5-6-41 (b). Appellant has also failed to follow the statutory procedures for securing either a transcript prepared from recollection or a stipulation of the case. See OCGA § 5-6-41 (g, i). “In the absence of a transcript, we cannot consider enumerations of error based on the evidence or proceedings at trial. [Cit.]” Malak v. State, 185 Ga. App. 313 (2) (363 SE2d 824) (1987).

2. Appellant enumerates as error the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial on the grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

“The trial court held a hearing, made findings of fact, and entered an order holding that [appellant] had not been denied effective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the record, and because the findings of the trial court are not shown to be clearly erroneous, we affirm. [Cit.]” Smith v. State, 256 Ga. 483 (351 SE2d 641) (1986).

3. We have considered appellant’s remaining enumerations and find them to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Sognier, J., concur.

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

*128 Carley, Judge.

Appellant was indicted for the misdemeanor offense of hindering a police officer in violation of former OCGA § 16-10-24. Appellant’s first trial ended in a mistrial when the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Appellant was retried and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The trial court denied appellant’s motion for new trial. Appellant now appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion for new trial and from the judgment of conviction and sentence which were entered on the guilty verdict.

1. Several of appellant’s enumerations of error relate to the conduct of the trial. However, the trial was not reported, and, consequently, there is no transcript of the trial. See OCGA § 5-6-41 (b). Appellant has also failed to follow the statutory procedures for securing either a transcript prepared from recollection or a stipulation of the case. See OCGA § 5-6-41 (g, i). “In the absence of a transcript, we cannot consider enumerations of error based on the evidence or proceedings at trial. [Cit.]” Malak v. State, 185 Ga. App. 313 (2) (363 SE2d 824) (1987).

2. Appellant enumerates as error the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial on the grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

“The trial court held a hearing, made findings of fact, and entered an order holding that [appellant] had not been denied effective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the record, and because the findings of the trial court are not shown to be clearly erroneous, we affirm. [Cit.]” Smith v. State, 256 Ga. 483 (351 SE2d 641) (1986).

3. We have considered appellant’s remaining enumerations and find them to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Sognier, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

372 S.E.2d 286, 188 Ga. App. 128, 1988 Ga. App. LEXIS 875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dean-v-state-gactapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack