Garland v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Garland v. State

665 S.E.2d 369, 292 Ga. App. 332, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 2357, 2008 Ga. App. LEXIS 768

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 27, 2008

DocketA06A1698

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 665 S.E.2d 369 (Garland 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

Garland v. State, 665 S.E.2d 369, 292 Ga. App. 332, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 2357, 2008 Ga. App. LEXIS 768 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Mikell, Judge.

In Garland v. State, 283 Ga. App. 622 (642 SE2d 320) (2007), we affirmed Mack Garland’s conviction for armed robbery and other crimes. Id. at 624-625 (3). We also held that the trial court did not err when it denied Mack Garland’s motion for the appointment of new counsel for purposes of appeal. Id. at 626 (6). On writ of certiorari, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed this portion of our decision, holding that Garland was “constitutionally entitled to the appointment of conflict-free counsel to represent him on appeal,” and remanding the case to the trial court “to consider [his] allegation of ineffective assistance under the representation of new counsel.” Garland v. State, 283 Ga. 201, 205 (657 SE2d 842) (2008). We hereby adopt the Supreme Court’s opinion as our own, reverse the trial court’s denial of Garland’s motion for the appointment of new counsel, and remand the case for further proceedings.

Judgment reversed and case remanded with direction.

Blackburn, P. J., and Adams, J., concur. *333 Joe W. Hendricks, Jr., District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Mikell, Judge.

In Garland v. State, 283 Ga. App. 622 (642 SE2d 320) (2007), we affirmed Mack Garland’s conviction for armed robbery and other crimes. Id. at 624-625 (3). We also held that the trial court did not err when it denied Mack Garland’s motion for the appointment of new counsel for purposes of appeal. Id. at 626 (6). On writ of certiorari, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed this portion of our decision, holding that Garland was “constitutionally entitled to the appointment of conflict-free counsel to represent him on appeal,” and remanding the case to the trial court “to consider [his] allegation of ineffective assistance under the representation of new counsel.” Garland v. State, 283 Ga. 201, 205 (657 SE2d 842) (2008). We hereby adopt the Supreme Court’s opinion as our own, reverse the trial court’s denial of Garland’s motion for the appointment of new counsel, and remand the case for further proceedings.

Judgment reversed and case remanded with direction.

Blackburn, P. J., and Adams, J., concur. *333 Joe W. Hendricks, Jr., District Attorney, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

665 S.E.2d 369, 292 Ga. App. 332, 2008 Fulton County D. Rep. 2357, 2008 Ga. App. LEXIS 768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garland-v-state-gactapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack