Mims v. State, A91A1329

• Decision Date: 23 September 1991
• Docket Number: No. A91A1329,A91A1329
• Citation: 201 Ga.App. 277,410 S.E.2d 824
• Parties: MIMS v. The STATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 824

410 S.E.2d 824

201 Ga.App. 277

MIMS v. The STATE.

No. A91A1329.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Sept. 23, 1991.

Barkley & Garner, Richard E. Barnes, Rome, for appellant.

Stephen F. Lanier, Dist. Atty., Lisa W. Pettit, Leigh E. Patterson, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.

BIRDSONG, Presiding Judge.

Barry Mims appeals his convictions of driving a motor vehicle after having been declared a habitual violator (OCGA § 40-5-58) and misdemeanor obstruction of a police officer. The record shows Mims was indicted on three counts, habitual violator, driving on a suspended license, and obstructing a police officer by giving a false name; but, pursuant to a negotiated plea, he pled guilty only to habitual violator and misdemeanor obstruction of an officer. The driving on a suspended license count was later dismissed.

The transcript shows that before entering the plea, Mims filed a motion to suppress, and after the motion to suppress was denied, he negotiated the agreement under which he pled guilty. At the time of his plea, however, Mims announced his intention to reserve his right to contest the denial of his motion to suppress. Mims now contends the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained by a police officer after what Mims contends was an illegal roadblock. Held:

1. We take this opportunity to clarify the procedures applicable when a defendant seeks to plead guilty while reserving the opportunity to appeal directly a prior adverse ruling by the trial court. Nothing in this opinion, however, concerns appeals of such rulings under the interlocutory appeals procedures in OCGA § 5-6-34(b).

The transcript states the trial judge permitted the defendant to preserve the denial of the motion to suppress for appellate review because "the Court of Appeals apparently accepts appeals on that basis." Although this court considers errors asserted after trial courts have permitted defendants to condition their guilty pleas on reserving the opportunity to appeal adverse rulings made prior to the plea (see, e.g., Daniel v. State, 199 Ga.App. 180, 404 S.E.2d 466), the general rule is that errors are not preserved because a guilty plea waives all defenses and objections, known and unknown. Thomason v. Caldwell, 229 Ga. 637, 644, 194 S.E.2d 112; Polk v. Holland, 229 Ga. 169, 170, 190 S.E.2d 35. Accord Morgan v. State, 191 Ga.App. 367, 368, 381 S.E.2d 583: A valid guilty plea is treated as a confession of guilt and waives all defenses known and unknown.

Further, as conditional pleas necessarily confer upon defendants benefits to which they are not otherwise entitled by our law, such guilty pleas are a form of plea bargaining that must be agreed to by the State. If not, the effect would be to authorize defendants to force the State to plea bargain and accept negotiated pleas, which defendants have no right to do. Mergel v. State, 198 Ga.App. 759, 760, 402 S.E.2d 800; Bostic v. State, 184 Ga.App. 509, 511, 361 S.E.2d 872. Consequently, trial courts should accept guilty pleas with this condition only when the prosecution expressly agrees. Otherwise the result will necessarily involve trial courts in unauthorized participation in plea discussions. See Rule 30, Uniform Rules for Superior Courts; Skomer v. State, 183 Ga.App. 308, 309-310, 358 S.E.2d 886.

Moreover, trial courts have the discretion to accept or reject guilty pleas (Harris v. State, 175 Ga.App. 134, 135, 332 S.E.2d 685; Echols v. State, 167 Ga.App. 307, 308, 306 S.E.2d 324), even when the guilty plea is part of a plea bargain. State v. Germany, 246 Ga. 455, 456, 271 S.E.2d 851. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the trial court to decide whether to exercise its discretion and accept a guilty plea on condition that appellate issues are preserved.

Accordingly, defendants have no right to condition guilty pleas upon reserving the appeal of any issues, and defendants may only reserve the appeal of such issues when the trial court, in the exercise of its discretion, allows a defendant to do so as part of a negotiated plea. Therefore, unless the trial court expressly approves the reservation of the issue and accepts the guilty plea with that condition, the issue is not preserved; and an unconditional guilty plea will waive any defenses and objections (Massey v. State, 137 Ga.App. 484, 485, 224 S.E.2d 117) except an appellate issue of whether such plea was voluntarily made by appellant and accepted following proper inquiry by the trial court. Because the trial court accepted Mims' guilty plea with his reservation, we will consider the error enumerated.

2. Mims contends the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress because the roadblock in this case did not meet the criteria established in Evans v. State, 190 Ga.App. 856, 380 S.E.2d 332 and State v. Golden, 171 Ga.App. 27, 318 S.E.2d 693 as the roadblock was not authorized by supervisory personnel and the roadblock was not well identified as a...