Massey v. Meadows, 41149
| Decision Date | 05 September 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 41149,41149 |
| Citation | 253 Ga. 389,321 S.E.2d 703 |
| Parties | MASSEY v. MEADOWS. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Earnest De Pascale, Jr., Nicholson, De Pascale, Harris & McArthur, Athens, for Jerry Massey, Sheriff.
Timothy W. Floyd, Legal Aid and Defender Society, Athens, for Timothy Mark Meadows.
Meadows entered a guilty plea to a charge of driving under the influence. His sentence was entered on a document which bears the heading "Misdemeanor Sentence (Probation)." The body of the document recites that Meadows is sentenced to confinement for a term of twelve months and ordered to pay a fine of $600.00 "as a condition precedent to the granting of any probation herein ordered or allowed." The document then goes on to provide that the confinement sentence may be served on probation if the defendant does not violate certain conditions.
Upon failure to pay the fine on the day of sentencing, Meadows was committed to jail without probation. The case comes to us as a result of the superior court having granted a writ of habeas corpus on the grounds that the state court did not make a determination that the failure to pay the fine was willful. The habeas court found there was evidence of a good faith effort to pay. Under Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660, 103 S.Ct. 2064, 76 L.Ed.2d 221 (1983), Meadows' confinement was unconstitutional if his failure to pay was not willful or if the court failed to find alternative forms of punishment inadequate. The habeas court sent the matter back to the state court for a full evidentiary hearing on the issue of how the fine would be paid, taking into consideration his ability to pay and alternative methods of punishment.
Appellant attempts to distinguish this case from Bearden, supra. Appellant's first contention that the sentence was a sentence of confinement rather than a sentence of probation, is not persuasive in view of the fact that the trial court specifically denominated it a sentence of probation, and the body of the sentence orders that it be served on probation. Further, the appellant's attempt to distinguish this case from Bearden on the ground that Meadows has not been found to be "indigent" is without merit.
It is true that Bearden dealt with revocation of probation because of failure to pay an installment of the fine upon which the probation was conditioned whereas here payment of the entire amount was a condition precedent to the probation. This,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Teagan v. City of McDonough
...Cir. 2018) (applying Bearden and Rainwater ).Georgia courts have also repeatedly applied Bearden . See, e.g., Massey v. Meadows , 253 Ga. 389, 321 S.E.2d 703, 704 (1984) ("[A] defendant’s probation may not be revoked or withheld because of his failure to pay the fine without a showing of wi......
-
Agan v. State
...Cir.1987); see Sabel v. State, 250 Ga. 640, 643(4), 300 S.E.2d 663 (1983), overruled in part on other grounds, Massey v. Meadows, 253 Ga. 389, 390, 321 S.E.2d 703 (1984). However, although a defendant must satisfy this two-prong test to sustain a defense of selective prosecution, to be enti......
-
Mackey v. State
...387, 388, 361 S.E.2d 691 (1987). 16. Id. 17. 250 Ga. 640, 643(4), 300 S.E.2d 663 (1983), overruled on other grounds, Massey v. Meadows, 253 Ga. 389, 321 S.E.2d 703 (1984). 18. (Citations omitted.) Sabel, supra, 250 Ga. at 643(4), 300 S.E.2d 19. See Brown v. State, 268 Ga. 154, 155, 486 S.E.......
-
Gardner v. State
...concerning the impropriety." Sabel v. State, 250 Ga. 640(5), 300 S.E.2d 663 (1983) (overruled on other grounds, Massey v. Meadows, 253 Ga. 389, 321 S.E.2d 703 (1984)). We have held that curative instructions are a proper remedy when a witness improperly places a defendant's character into e......