Goode v. Nobles, S99A0191.
| Decision Date | 03 May 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. S99A0191.,S99A0191. |
| Citation | 518 S.E.2d 122,271 Ga. 30 |
| Parties | GOODE v. NOBLES. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Leaphart & Johnson, J. Alvin Leaphart, Jesup, for appellant.
Dupont K. Cheney, District Attorney, James S. Archer, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Pursuant to a negotiated plea of guilty to one count each of "menacing" and assault in Colorado, Ronnie Eugene Goode was sentenced to four years of probation. Upon his request, he was permitted to serve that probation in Georgia. Shortly after Goode returned to Georgia, his wife, the victim of the Colorado offenses, demanded that he move out of the marital home, which he did. Although his Georgia probation officer instructed Goode to avoid contact with his wife after moving out, Goode returned at her invitation, but then had an altercation with her. That altercation ultimately served as the basis for a complaint for revocation of his probation and the issuance of an arrest warrant, both in Colorado. After Goode's arrest in Georgia on that warrant, a Governor's warrant was issued in response to a request from Colorado. Goode filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Following a hearing at which Goode stipulated that the Governor's warrant was in order and that he was the person sought, the trial court denied the petition and ordered Goode's return to Colorado. This appeal is from that order. 1
Among the findings made by the trial court in its order denying Goode's petition for habeas corpus is that Goode had waived extradition to Colorado. Support for that finding is found in a document signed by Goode in which he requested that he be permitted to be supervised as a probationer in Georgia. In that document appears the following sentence: "I hereby waive extradition to the sending state from any state of the United States and also agree that I will not contest any effort by any jurisdiction to return me to the sending state." Goode does not contest the fact that he signed the waiver of extradition, but contends the waiver is ineffective because it was not voluntary in that the alternative to signing the waiver was to be held hostage by the State of Colorado.
Goode was not a hostage held by the State of Colorado, but was instead a person convicted of a crime in that State who was permitted as a matter of the grace of that State to serve his sentence on probation rather than in prison. Gehl v. People, 161 Colo. 535, 539, 423 P.2d 332 (1967). Georgia, too, views probation as a matter of grace, upon the granting of which conditions may be imposed.
[Cit.]
Staley v. State, 233 Ga.App. 597, 599, 505 S.E.2d 491 (1998). When the grace Colorado had granted Goode was extended to permit him to serve his period of probation in his home state, it required from him the reciprocal promise that he would return without protest to Colorado in the event he was summoned there. We do not agree with Goode that his promise to return was involuntary because he could not have returned to Georgia had he not given it.
In some instances a condition of probation involves a waiver of a defendant's rights including those protected by state or federal constitutions. However, the conditions of probation are not imposed involuntarily, but are accepted by convicted criminals as a condition necessary to avoid incarceration in the penitentiary. [Cit.] Whether the waiver of rights required under the condition of probation amounts to an abuse of discretion depends upon whether it is [Cits.]
Tuttle v. State, 215 Ga.App. 396(2), 450 S.E.2d 863 (1994). See also Mann v. State, 154 Ga.App. 677, 269 S.E.2d 863 (1980) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rutledge v. State
...to an extent that would be completely untenable under ordinary circumstances." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Goode v. Nobles , 271 Ga. 30, 31, 518 S.E.2d 122 (1999). As the United States Supreme Court has explained, "[i]nherent in the very nature of probation is that probationers do n......
-
Johnson v. State
...have addressed the issue, however, and generally have held that such waivers are enforceable. See, e.g., Goode v. Nobles, 271 Ga. 30, 518 S.E.2d 122, 123–24 (1999); People v. Velarde, 739 P.2d 845, 849 (Colo.1987); State v. Maglio, 189 N.J.Super. 257, 459 A.2d 1209, 1212 (1983). It is only ......
- Clark v. State
-
Talley v. State, A04A1914.
...omitted.) Walker v. State, 258 Ga.App. 333, 336(3), 574 S.E.2d 400 (2002). 7. (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Goode v. Nobles, 271 Ga. 30, 31-32, 518 S.E.2d 122 (1999). 8. (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Tuttle v. State, 215 Ga.App. 396, 397(2), 450 S.E.2d 863 ...
-
Banishment in Georgia: a New Approach to Domestic Violence
...The Eleventh Circuit 24. See Terry v. Hamrick, 663 S.E.2d 256, 260 (Ga. 2008), cert denied, 129 S. Ct. 510 (2008); Goode v. Nobles, 518 S.E.2d 122, 123 (Ga. 1999) (quoting Staley v. State, 505 S.E.2d 491, 494 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998)); see also People v. Smith, 62 Cal. Rptr. 3d 316, 318 (Cal. Ct......