Hunt v. Hopper
Decision Date | 04 April 1974 |
Docket Number | No. 28710,28710 |
Citation | 232 Ga. 53,205 S.E.2d 303 |
Parties | John Thomas HUNT v. Joe S. HOPPER. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Millard C. Farmer, Jr., Steven E. Fanning, Newnan, for appellant.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., William F. Bartee, Jr., David J. Bailey, Asst. Attys. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
On May 24, 1972 John Thomas Hunt was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. On December 14, 1972 that conviction was affirmed by this court. Hunt v. State, 229 Ga. 869, 195 S.E.2d 31. Thereafter the present petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed. While numerous questions were raised in such petition as originally filed, all but two questions were abandoned prior to the trial court's judgment. The two questions presented to the trial court for decision and to this court on review are whether the conviction must be set aside because counsel was not appointed to represent him (1) prior to a pre-indictment line-up and (2) prior to a preliminary hearing at which he was bound over to the grand jury. Held:
1. The failure to appoint counsel to represent the prisoner to a pre-indictment line-up which took place prior to the prisoner's commitment hearing did not invalidate the prisoner's conviction. See Hunt v. State, 229 Ga. 869, 195 S.E.2d 31, supra; Hicks v. Caldwell, 231 Ga. 575, 203 S.E.2d 212, and cits.
2. A commitment hearing was held shortly after the prisoner's arrest and the record, including exhibits introduced by the prisoner, make it doubtful as to whether he was represented by counsel. In the case of Phillips v. Stynchcombe, 231 Ga. 430, 432, 202 S.E.2d 26, it was held:
Accordingly, where a commitment hearing was held, assuming but not deciding that he was not represented by counsel, the question is whether the prisoner was harmed. See Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705.
As a result of the commitment hearing the prisoner was released on bond. The only testimony adduced at such...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Houston
...where there is no waiver, will require a new trial if the absence of counsel causes harm to the defendant. See, also, Hunt v. Hopper, 232 Ga. 53, 55, 205 S.E.2d 303. I would add that there is always a very real possibility, where counsel has been denied at a preliminary hearing, for prejudi......
-
Watts v. Pitts
...236 Ga. 65, 222 S.E.2d 362 (1976); State v. Hightower, supra; Tarpkin v. State, 236 Ga. 67, 222 S.E.2d 364 (1976); and Hunt v. Hopper, 232 Ga. 53, 205 S.E.2d 303 (1974). These cases recognize that, in Georgia, a commitment hearing, if held, is a critical stage in criminal proceedings, that ......
-
Cobble v. Cobb Cnty. Police Dep't
...a commitment hearing. Rather, the right to such a hearing is statutory." 418 S.E.2d 383, 384 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992) (citing Hunt v. Hopper, 205 S.E.2d 303, 305 (Ga. 1974)). While probable cause is required to detain an individual awaiting further proceedings, the Fourth Amendment does not requ......
-
State v. Houston
...the defendant did not raise the issue upon his trial or appeal therefrom, but only later by habeas corpus petition, or Hunt v. Hopper, 232 Ga. 53, 205 S.E.2d 303, which was based thereon. In the case at bar, the issue was timely raised and ruled upon by the trial judge. While this court is ......