Wells v. State

722 S.E.2d 133, 313 Ga. App. 528, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 163, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 15
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 12, 2012
DocketA11A1780
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 722 S.E.2d 133 (Wells 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
Wells v. State, 722 S.E.2d 133, 313 Ga. App. 528, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 163, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 15 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

PHIPPS, Presiding Judge.

William Wells was convicted of giving a false name to a law enforcement officer and of three felony counts of violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act. On appeal, Wells contends that the trial court erred by sentencing him as a recidivist. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

1. Wells acknowledges that the state served him with notice of its intent to seek aggravation of punishment as a recidivist and attached copies of his prior guilty plea convictions to the notice, but argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove the existence of any of the prior convictions because the state did not introduce copies of the prior convictions into evidence during the trial or at the sentencing hearing. Wells further acknowledges that at the sentencing hearing he failed to object (on any grounds) to the trial court’s consideration of the documents.

When the state seeks recidivist punishment based on guilty pleas, in a case not involving the death penalty, it bears the burden of proving (1) the existence of prior guilty pleas and (2) that the defendant was represented by counsel in all felony cases and those misdemeanor proceedings where imprisonment resulted. 1 If the state makes such a showing, “the presumption of regularity” attaches and “the burden shifts to the defendant to produce some affirmative evidence showing an infringement of his rights or a procedural irregularity in the taking of the plea.” 2

“No requirement exists under Georgia law which would limit the state to a single means of proving prior convictions of a criminal defendant in order to have the recidivism statute applied to the sentencing of the defendant.” 3 Concerning the conduct of a pre- *529 sentence hearing in felony cases, OCGA § 17-10-2 (a) (1) pertinently provides that “the judge shall hear additional evidence in extenuation, mitigation, and aggravation of punishment, including the record of any prior criminal convictions and pleas of guilty or nolo contendere of the accused, or the absence of any prior conviction and pleas.” We have held that when no objection to the form of the evidence of the prior conviction was made at the pre-sentence hearing, the issue was not preserved for review on appeal. 4

Here, the record shows that the state served Wells with a list of evidence in aggravation of sentencing and specifically invoked the statutory recidivist sentencing provisions. That evidence included three certified copies of prior guilty plea convictions. The transcript shows that at the pre-sentence hearing 5 the judge had copies of the prior convictions and defense counsel never objected to the consideration of any of the listed offenses or argued that the state was required to introduce the prior convictions into evidence. Rather, after the judge reviewed on the record the copies of the prior convictions and asked whether there were “[a]ny comments on that,” defense counsel merely responded that “We were properly served and notified, Your Honor.” An examination of the prior convictions shows that the defendant was represented by counsel in connection with those guilty pleas. Wells failed to rebut the presumption of regularity and failed to object to the form of the evidence of the prior convictions and thus failed to preserve this issue for review on appeal. 6

Wells recognizes that the current status of the law is against the position he now takes on appeal, and argues that we should “take a second look at the reasoning [of] the holdings in Nash and Thompson [and] overrule those cases and the line of cases with the same holdings regarding the sufficiency of proof in recidivist sentences. ...” But the law is well established on this point. In Nash v. State, 7 the Supreme Court of Georgia revised the scheme regarding the allocation of burdens of proof as to the use of guilty pleas in *530 sentence enhancement in nondeath penalty cases. 8 We point out that “[t]he purpose of [OCGA] § 17-10-2 is to give [a] defendant a chance to examine his record to determine if the convictions are in fact his, if he was represented by counsel, and any other defect which would render such documents inadmissible during the pre-sentencing phase of the trial.” 9 Wells had that opportunity, but failed to show that the evidence was inadmissible. Accordingly, we find no grounds for reversal. 10

2. Wells further contends that, in the event this court finds the evidence of prior convictions was sufficient, the trial court nonetheless erred by sentencing him as a recidivist because the state failed to show that the crime to which he pled guilty in Alabama would have been a felony in Georgia. 11 We need not address this issue because Wells failed to raise this argument at the sentencing hearing, and thus appellate review is precluded. 12

Notwithstanding, the records of the Alabama conviction show that Wells pled guilty to the offense of burglary in the third degree and received a sentence of four years imprisonment. Under Georgia law, burglary is a felony 13 and

[a] person commits the offense of burglary when, without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft *531 therein, he enters or remains within the dwelling house of another or any building... or other such structure designed for use as the dwelling of another or enters or remains within any other building ... or any room or any part thereof. 14
Decided January 12, 2012. Drummond & Swindle, Jason W Swindle, for appellant. David McDade, District Attorney, James A. Dooley, Rachel D. Ackley, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee.

The Alabama indictment charged that Wells “did knowingly enter or remain unlawfully in a building of [M. S.] with intent to commit a crime therein, to-wit: theft. ...” The elements of the crime as charged in the Alabama indictment are similar to the elements required to commit the crime under the Georgia statute. Thus, Wells’s argument presents no basis for reversal.

Judgment affirmed.

Andrews and McFadden, JJ., concur.
1

See

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

Related

John Anthony Frilando v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2021
von Thomas v. State
748 S.E.2d 446 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
722 S.E.2d 133, 313 Ga. App. 528, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 163, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-v-state-gactapp-2012.