Mason v. Balcom, 27929

• Citation: 199 S.E.2d 313,230 Ga. 838
• Decision Date: 21 June 1973
• Docket Number: No. 27929,27929
• Parties: Marion MASON v. Charles BALCOM.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 313

199 S.E.2d 313

230 Ga. 838

Marion MASON v. Charles BALCOM.

No. 27929.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

June 21, 1973.

Rehearing Denied July 12, 1973.

Grace W. Thomas, Atlanta, for appellant.

Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Courtney Wilder Stanton, Daniel I. MacIntyre, Asst. Attys. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

GRICE, Presiding Justice.

This appeal is from the denial of the writ of habeas corpus.

The petitioner alleged that he was being unlawfully detained by the superintendent of a named penal institution pursuant to sentences for robbery and burglary imposed by a superior court. He averred in essence that the sentences are void because his pleas of guilty were not knowingly and voluntarily entered into and because he was without the assistance of competent counsel.

The respondent superintendent denied the essential allegations of the petition.

Upon the hearing in the habeas corpus court the evidence was in conflict on the substantial issues involved. The judge found that the petitioner knowingly and voluntarily entered the pleas of guilty, that he had competent counsel, that none of his rights were violated, and therefore remanded him to the custody of the respondent.

Upon review here we have concluded that the evidence authorized these findings. The record affirmatively shows that the pleas were knowingly and voluntarily entered and that the petitioner had competent counsel. See Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274. Therefore the judgment of the habeas corpus court was correct.

In reaching this conclusion were are not mindful of the recent decision of Walker v. Caldwell, 476 F.2d 213 (5 Cir.). However, it is clearly distinguishable on its facts in several decisive particulars, as pointed out by respondent's counsel here.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.