Zenlenski v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Zenlenski v. State

359 S.E.2d 676, 257 Ga. 381, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 855

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 9, 1987

Docket44679

StatusPublished

This text of 359 S.E.2d 676 (Zenlenski 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

Zenlenski v. State, 359 S.E.2d 676, 257 Ga. 381, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 855 (Ga. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Clarke, Presiding Justice.

In December of 1986, this Court approved for a period of one year an experimental project proposed by the superior courts of the Stone Mountain Circuit. The project allows the conduct of arraignments and other non-jury hearings without the physical presence of the defendant but with the use of a closed circuit television system which provides means for communication between the court, counsel and the defendant. Over objection of the defendant, this system was utilized in the taking of a plea of guilty to burglary. Even though the defendant was sentenced to four years on probation as a first offender, he appeals.

We reverse, but not on the constitutional and statutory grounds raised by the defendant.

This case turns on an interpretation of the phrase “other non-jury hearings” in this Court’s order approving the project. We hold the phrase does not contemplate a guilty plea as being within its reach. Like a bench trial, acceptance of a guilty plea is more than an arraignment or other non-jury hearing such as appointment of counsel, plea of not guilty or plea of nolo contendere since it includes the ultimate proceeding in the adjudication of guilt or innocence. Therefore the proceeding is not one covered by the experimental project.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Clarke, Presiding Justice.

In December of 1986, this Court approved for a period of one year an experimental project proposed by the superior courts of the Stone Mountain Circuit. The project allows the conduct of arraignments and other non-jury hearings without the physical presence of the defendant but with the use of a closed circuit television system which provides means for communication between the court, counsel and the defendant. Over objection of the defendant, this system was utilized in the taking of a plea of guilty to burglary. Even though the defendant was sentenced to four years on probation as a first offender, he appeals.

We reverse, but not on the constitutional and statutory grounds raised by the defendant.

This case turns on an interpretation of the phrase “other non-jury hearings” in this Court’s order approving the project. We hold the phrase does not contemplate a guilty plea as being within its reach. Like a bench trial, acceptance of a guilty plea is more than an arraignment or other non-jury hearing such as appointment of counsel, plea of not guilty or plea of nolo contendere since it includes the ultimate proceeding in the adjudication of guilt or innocence. Therefore the proceeding is not one covered by the experimental project.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 S.E.2d 676, 257 Ga. 381, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zenlenski-v-state-ga-1987.