Cochran v. State, 40730
| Decision Date | 22 May 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 40730,40730 |
| Citation | 253 Ga. 10,315 S.E.2d 653 |
| Parties | COCHRAN v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Henry Lee Cochran, pro se.
J. Brown Moseley, Dist. Atty., Bainbridge, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., for the State.
This is a case which presents the issue of the court's duty when a criminal defendant indicates he wishes to prosecute his appeal pro se.
Cochran was charged with the murder of his wife, and the State sought the death penalty. He was found guilty but the jury recommended a life sentence. Upon sentencing him, the trial judge asked Cochran if he had anything to say. He expressed his gratitude to his two lawyers who were representing him under appointment of the court. He then went on to say that he wished to terminate their services and wanted all of the trial records forwarded to him. He later filed a written request to be allowed to represent himself citing Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). Thereafter he filed a notice of appeal but did not file enumerations of error or a brief. When he requested an extension of time for the filing of the enumerations and brief, the court granted him an additional ten days. Two days after the expiration of the ten day period, Cochran filed another motion, the substance of which was to ask for more time or in the alternative the right to take an out of time appeal. It appears that his alternate motion sought the dismissal of the pending appeal without prejudice in order to take an out of time appeal.
To consider Cochran's motion, it is necessary to review the colloquy with the trial court at the time Cochran announced his desire to proceed with the appeal pro se. We have done so and find that the record reveals no explanation to Cochran of his entitlement to counsel and the dangers of proceeding without counsel.
In Clarke v. Zant, 247 Ga. 194, 275 S.E.2d 49 (1981), we discussed the dilemma faced by a trial judge when a criminal defendant refuses representation by appointed counsel and announces his desire to represent himself. In doing so, we recognized the right of self representation as pronounced in Faretta v. California, supra. We also found that a defendant cannot exercise this right unless it is shown that he has adequately waived his right to counsel. Taylor v. Ricketts, 239 Ga. 501, 238 S.E.2d 52 (1977). In Clarke v. Zant, we observed that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cochran v. State
...Institution. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. 1 We granted Cochran's motion for an out-of-time appeal. Cochran v. State, 253 Ga. 10, 315 S.E.2d 653 (1984) and address here the enumerations of error filed by recently appointed counsel, which raise issues nearly identical to those liste......
-
State v. Stewart
...Woods , 440 F.2d 835, 836 (7th Cir. 1971) ; United States ex rel. Smith v. McMann , 417 F.2d 648, 654 (2d Cir. 1969) ; Cochran v. State , 253 Ga. 10, 315 S.E.2d 653, 654 (1984) ; State v. Allen , 99 N.J.Super. 314, 239 A.2d 675, 677 (1968). Fair enough. But none of these precedents is contr......
-
Shirley v. State
...process and equal protection of the law. For other examples, see Gaylor v. State, 247 Ga. 759, 279 S.E.2d 207 (1981); Cochran v. State, 253 Ga. 10, 315 S.E.2d 653 (1984); Curry v. State, 148 Ga.App. 59, 251 S.E.2d 86 (1978); Mobley v. State, 162 Ga.App. 23(1), 288 S.E.2d 702 (1982); Cannon ......
- State of Ga. v. McKenna
-
Hush, Little Baby, Don't Say a Word: How Seeking the "best Interests of the Child" Fostered a Lack of Accountability in Georgia's Juvenile Courts - Sarah Gerwig-moore and Leigh S. Schrope
...between the two. An indigent defendant is entitled to representation by counsel on appeal as well as at trial. Cochran v. State, 253 Ga. 10, 11, 315 S.E.2d 653, 654 (1984). 155. Black's Law Dictionary 4 (7th ed. 1999). 156. See, e.g., In the Interest of A.Q.H., 239 Ga. App. 865, 866, 522 S.......