Smallwood v. State, s. 64051
| Decision Date | 24 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | 64222,Nos. 64051,s. 64051 |
| Citation | 293 S.E.2d 15,163 Ga.App. 140 |
| Parties | SMALLWOOD v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Charles W. Smith, Jr., Gainesville, for appellant.
Jeff C. Wayne, Dist. Atty., Patrick F. McMahon, Asst. Dist. Atty., Gainesville, for appellee.
The defendant appeals the revocation of his probation on two burglary charges. Held :
1. It is contended that the trial court erred in failing to make a sufficient written statement as to the evidence relied upon in revoking defendant's probation.
This contention would have been meritorious prior to October 27, 1981. See for example Reed v. State, 151 Ga.App. 226, 227, 259 S.E.2d 209; Bohanan v. State, 159 Ga.App. 886, 285 S.E.2d 612. However, on that date the Georgia Supreme Court interpreted the language found in Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 92 S.Ct. 2593, 33 L.Ed.2d 484 to the effect that the minimum requirements of due process in parole revocation hearings [extended to probation regulation proceedings by Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778, 93 S.Ct. 1756, 36 L.Ed.2d 656] included " '(f) a written statement by the factfinders as to the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking parole.' " State v. Brinson, 248 Ga. 380, 283 S.E.2d 463. Our Supreme Court found this language should not be interpreted literally. Instead, what it meant was that the appellate court must have sufficient written record before it to ascertain the basis for revocation of defendant's probation. The court pointed out ... State v. Brinson, 248 Ga. 380, 381, 283 S.E.2d 463, supra.
Adopting that reasoning, which we are compelled to do, there is sufficient written record (the hearing transcript) for this court to determine on what grounds the trial court revoked probation.
2. In a proceeding of this type, the trial judge acts as the trier of fact with a very wide discretion which will not be controlled in the absence of a manifest abuse of such discretion. Harper v. State, 146 Ga.App. 337, 338, 246 S.E.2d 391; Hogan v. State, 158 Ga.App. 495(1), 280 S.E.2d 891.
3. State v. Brinson, 248 Ga. 380(4), 283 S.E.2d 463, supra, reiterated the rule " '[A] court may take...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority v. Tuck
... ... , the jury shall assess damages against all of them jointly in one amount, is of force in this state. [Cit.] This being a case for personal injuries, a several verdict against the joint defendants ... ...
-
Dasher v. State
...with a very wide discretion which will not be controlled in the absence of a manifest abuse of such discretion." Smallwood v. State, 163 Ga.App. 140, 141, 293 S.E.2d 15 (1982); Harper v. State, 146 Ga.App. 337, 246 S.E.2d 391 (1978). Moreover, it must be remembered that " '[o]nly slight evi......
-
Haji v. State
...sufficient written record for us to determine the ground upon which the trial court revoked Haji's probation. Smallwood v. State, 163 Ga.App. 140, 141(1), 293 S.E.2d 15 (1982).3. Sufficiency of the evidence to authorize revocation. Haji claims that the evidence was insufficient to support t......
-
Griffin v. State, 65637
...283 S.E.2d 463 (1981), and is therefore meritless. See Bradshaw v. State, 163 Ga.App. 819, 296 S.E.2d 119 (1982); Smallwood v. State, 163 Ga.App. 140(1), 293 S.E.2d 15 (1982); Askea v. State, 160 Ga.App. 328(1), 287 S.E.2d 65 Judgment affirmed. QUILLIAN, P.J., and SOGNIER, J., concur. ...