Hunter v. State

399 S.E.2d 921, 260 Ga. 762
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 31, 1991
DocketS90A1525
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 399 S.E.2d 921 (Hunter v. State) 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
Hunter v. State, 399 S.E.2d 921, 260 Ga. 762 (Ga. 1991).

Opinion

*762 Benham, Justice.

This appeal is from the denial of relief sought in a pleading entitled “Motion for Out-of-Time Appeal.” Appellant entered a guilty plea in 1974 in Schley County to six offenses, one of them being murder. In 1988, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed in Tattnall County where appellant was incarcerated and including as one of its grounds the allegedly ineffective assistance of counsel, was denied. In 1990, appellant filed the pleading which led to this appeal, but he filed it in Schley County, where he entered his guilty plea. The ground on which he claimed entitlement to an out-of-time appeal was that his appointed counsel in the 1974 prosecution failed to file an appeal even though appellant asked him to do so. The trial court in the present action held that appellant’s claim was barred by the adverse ruling on the same issue in the 1988 habeas action.

An out of time appeal occasionally is appropriate where, due to ineffective assistance of counsel, no appeal has been taken. [Cit.] That is not the case here. [Williams v. State, 251 Ga. 83 (303 SE2d 111) (1983).]

That is not the case here because the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel was decided adversely to appellant in the 1988 habeas action and that judgment is conclusive on the issue. Wells v. Keith, 213 Ga. 858 (102 SE2d 533) (1958). The trial court was correct in denying appellant’s motion for out-of-time appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Sessions v. State
743 S.E.2d 391 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
Hollins v. State
695 S.E.2d 23 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2010)
Rehberger v. State
600 S.E.2d 635 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2004)
Simmons v. State
579 S.E.2d 735 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2003)
Neisler v. State
556 S.E.2d 258 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2001)
Walker v. Penn
523 S.E.2d 325 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)
Turpin v. Todd
493 S.E.2d 900 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1997)
Martin v. State
492 S.E.2d 307 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Atkinson v. State
466 S.E.2d 32 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1995)
Morrow v. State
463 S.E.2d 472 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Judkins v. State
463 S.E.2d 362 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1995)
Whatley v. State
462 S.E.2d 779 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1995)
Crowder v. State
461 S.E.2d 865 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Henderson v. State
454 S.E.2d 458 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Rowland v. State
452 S.E.2d 756 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Lane v. State
436 S.E.2d 9 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1993)
Holt v. State
421 S.E.2d 131 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
399 S.E.2d 921, 260 Ga. 762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-state-ga-1991.