Simmons v. State

726 S.E.2d 573, 315 Ga. App. 82, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 1293, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 320
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 22, 2012
DocketA11A2093
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 726 S.E.2d 573 (Simmons 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
Simmons v. State, 726 S.E.2d 573, 315 Ga. App. 82, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 1293, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 320 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

PHIPPS, Presiding Judge.

Jonathan Simmons appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to withdraw his negotiated plea of guilty to possession of a controlled substance (hydrocodone), possession of marijuana, and improper turn. The trial court held that the motion to withdraw, filed in 2011, was untimely for purposes of withdrawing the guilty plea, which was entered in 2004. We agree. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court denying the motion to withdraw. The record also shows, however, that after Simmons violated the terms of his first offender probation, the trial court, in 2007, entered a ten-year probated sentence for possession of a controlled substance. Because the trial court imposed a sentence not allowed by law, the sentence is void, and we remand the case with direction that Simmons be resentenced.

The record shows that on April 6, 2004, Simmons entered a negotiated plea of guilty to possession of a Schedule III controlled substance (hydrocodone), 1 misdemeanor possession of marijuana, 2 and improper turn. 3 He was afforded first offender treatment and sentenced to three years for possession of a controlled substance (hydrocodone), twelve months for possession of marijuana, and twelve months for improper turn, with the sentences to run concurrently and to be served on probation. Following an April 19, 2007, hearing on the state’s claim that Simmons had violated the terms of his probation, 4 the trial court entered an adjudication of guilt on the offenses for which Simmons had received probation under the First Offender Act. 5 The trial court then sentenced Simmons to ten years probation for possession of a controlled substance, 6 subject to his service of 360-400 days in a Georgia Department of Corrections detention facility, among other conditions, 7 and entered the final disposition thereof on April 20, 2007.

*83 On May 10,2011, Simmons filed a motion to withdraw guilty plea on the ground that his sentence was not permitted by law, he did not knowingly and voluntarily enter the plea, and his attorney was ineffective. The trial court denied the motion as untimely, noting the requirement that a motion to withdraw a guilty plea be made within the term of court that the plea is entered.

1. Simmons contends that the trial court entered a void sentence in 2007 on the count of possession of hydrocodone, and retained jurisdiction to correct that void sentence at any time. 8 We agree. “Because the trial court’s ruling on a legal question is not due any deference, we apply the ‘plain legal error’ standard of review.” 9

OCGA § 16-13-30 (g) provides that persons who have violated OCGA § 16-13-30 (a) “with respect to a controlled substance in Schedule III 10 . . . shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years.” It follows that the ten-year felony sentence entered by the trial court on April 20, 2007, is outside the statutory range and void. 11 And “when a sentence is void, a trial court has jurisdiction to resentence the defendant at any time.” 12

2. Simmons further claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance (hydrocodone). 13 We disagree. The trial court denied Simmons’s motion to withdraw because it was untimely. This issue involves application of the law to undisputed facts, and so our review is de novo. 14

The general rule, as Simmons acknowledges, is that “when the term of court has expired in which a defendant was sentenced pursuant to a guilty plea the trial court lacks jurisdiction to allow the *84 withdrawal of the plea.” 15 In such case, a guilty plea may be withdrawn only through habeas corpus proceedings. 16 Simmons entered his guilty plea in 2004, seven years before he filed his motion to withdraw, and so, under the general rule, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to allow withdrawal of the plea. Simmons, however, relies on the exception that, “[s]ince a void sentence is the same as no sentence at all, the defendant stands in the position as if he had pled guilty and not been sentenced, and so may withdraw his guilty plea as of right before resentencing, even following the expiration of the term of court in which the void sentence was pronounced.” 17

The rationale for the exception lies with OCGA § 17-7-93 (b), as our analysis in Kaiser v. State 18 shows. That subsection provides, in pertinent part, that “[a] t any time before judgment is pronounced, the accused person may withdraw the plea of guilty and plead not guilty.” 19 But Simmons, having availed himself of the First Offender Act, did not retain the right to withdraw his guilty plea as a matter of right pending entry of an adjudication of guilt. In the context of the First Offender Act,

the reducing to writing of the trial judge’s probation sentence and the filing of the same with the Clerk of the Court is a sufficient compliance therewith, so as to prevent the withdrawal of the plea of guilty as a matter of right. The contention of the defendant that he had until the adjudication of guilt, at a hearing to revoke the probation, had been reduced to writing and filed with the Clerk of the Court is, in our opinion, untenable; and that to so hold would constitute an abuse of the statute enacted for the benefit of first offenders, and thus permit them, after the passage of months and even years, and after witnesses are gone or dispersed, or even dead, to withdraw a plea of guilty and demand a trial. 20
*85 Decided March 22, 2012. Cris E. Schneider, for appellant. Tom Durden, District Attorney, Sandra Dutton, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Related

Royhem Deeds v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2019
Charles v. the State
791 S.E.2d 584 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2016)
Hanh v. the State
790 S.E.2d 282 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2016)
Nelson v. the State
764 S.E.2d 883 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014)
Crisincio Timothy Franks v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2013
Franks v. State
748 S.E.2d 291 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
726 S.E.2d 573, 315 Ga. App. 82, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 1293, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-state-gactapp-2012.