Rogers v. State
Decision Date | 14 November 1980 |
Docket Number | No. 60459,60459 |
Citation | 156 Ga.App. 466,274 S.E.2d 815 |
Parties | ROGERS v. The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Charles Brown, Larry Fowler, Cleveland, for appellant.
Jeff C. Wayne, Dist. Atty., for appellee.
Appellant was found guilty of aggravated assault. He appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for new trial.
At the start of the trial, the district attorney called the case for trial at which time the appellant answered "Here." The trial court asked appellant if he was ready and appellant answered affirmatively. The trial court then stated: "You are going to represent yourself, is that correct?" Appellant answered, "Yes, sir." At the close of the trial, the trial court instructed appellant on his right to appeal the conviction. The following exchange took place:
A defendant in a criminal prosecution is entitled to the assistance of counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Code Ann. §§ 1-806 and 1-815, as well as the Georgia Constitution, Art. I, Sec. I, Par. XI (Code Ann. § 2-111). The record must disclose that the defendant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived counsel and in doing so he must be advised of his right to counsel, if he cannot afford counsel, and the consequences of his refusal to accept counsel. Blue v. State, 144 Ga.App. 378, 379, 241 S.E.2d 36 (1977). In the instant case, there is nothing in the record to indicate that the trial court so advised appellant. The trial court merely ascertained that appellant was going to represent himself; it did not ascertain that appellant was aware of his right to counsel. Thus, we do not believe there has been an intelligent and knowing waiver here.
The presumption is against waiver, and it is the responsibility of the court, when the accused is without counsel, to clearly determine whether there has been a proper waiver. Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461, 146 A.L.R. 357 (1937). " " Campbell v. State, 128 Ga.App. 74, 76, 195 S.E.2d 664 (1973); Blue v. State, supra.
The state argues that appellant knowingly and intelligently chose to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hasty v. State, A94A1101
...himself, he must have an opportunity to voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to counsel.' Rogers v. State, 156 Ga.App. 466(1) (274 SE2d 815)." Fernandez v. State, 171 Ga.App. 290, 292, 319 S.E.2d 503 (1984). See also Callaway v. State, supra. Cf. Mock v. State, 163 Ga.A......
-
Ward v. State
...could not afford one and did not ascertain whether she had consulted with an attorney before entering her plea. See Rogers v. State, 156 Ga.App. 466, 274 S.E.2d 815 (1980); see also Rose v. State, 128 Ga.App. 370, 371-372, 196 S.E.2d 683 (1973). Thus, we must remand for a hearing to determi......
-
Fernandez v. State, 67987
...himself, he must have had an opportunity to voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to counsel." Rogers v. State, 156 Ga.App. 466(1), 274 S.E.2d 815. Our Supreme Court has held that "[i]n determining whether or not an accused has adequately waived his right to counsel and ......
-
Smith v. State, A98A0009.
...himself, he must have an opportunity to voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to counsel. Rogers v. State, 156 Ga.App. 466(1), 274 S.E.2d 815 [ (1980) ]. Fernandez v. State, 171 Ga.App. 290, 292, 319 S.E.2d 503 (1984). [Cit.] Cf. Mock v. State, 163 Ga. App. 320, 321, 293......