Yull v. State, A97A0270

Decision Date11 June 1997
Docket NumberNo. A97A0270,A97A0270
Citation487 S.E.2d 508,226 Ga.App. 775
Parties, 97 FCDR 2315 YULL v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Benjamin Yull, pro se.

J. Tom Morgan, District Attorney, Robert M. Coker, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


Yull has filed this pro se appeal from his conviction of burglary. OCGA § 16-7-1.

1. He enumerates as error the court's denial of his request for access to certain transcripts or tapes which would have exonerated him. As to such a ruling, appellant bears the burden of showing error affirmatively by the record. Veit v. State, 182 Ga.App. 753, 758(6), 357 S.E.2d 113 (1987). Yull does not cite to, nor have we found, this ruling in the record. It appears that the material referred to by Yull concerns a burglar alarm call which the arresting officer received prior to apprehending Yull. The transcript of a pretrial hearing shows that the court did grant Yull access to a log of this call. No error is shown.

2. Yull also contends that the transcripts are not true and correct, but this is unsupported.

3. We do reach, however, Yull's complaint of the denial of his right to the assistance of trial and appellate counsel.

At arraignment, the DeKalb County Public Defender's Office was appointed to represent Yull. One week before trial, Yull discharged his court-appointed attorney at an unreported hearing from which counsel was absent. The parties agree that Yull requested that another attorney be appointed because the public defender was not prepared to go to trial. The court denied the request, based on its determination that Yull was merely trying to delay the proceedings. Yull states that the day prior to the unreported hearing, the public defender informed him that he should either plead guilty because of the strength of the evidence against him or ask the court to appoint another defense attorney. According to Yull, he requested that the public defender be made to appear at the hearing; that the judge denied this request, stating that he knew Yull's defense counsel and that he was or would be prepared to go to trial; and that Yull then elected to proceed pro se after being informed by the court that his choices were to either represent himself or have the public defender continue to represent him.

Yull was charged with burglary, a felony. He thus had an unconditional and absolute right to a lawyer absent a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent waiver of that right. Fernandez v. State, 171 Ga.App. 290, 292, 319 S.E.2d 503 (1984). Yull's waiver of his right to counsel was not voluntary if, as he claimed, he was forced to proceed pro se because counsel was either unprepared or unwilling to go to trial. Since no response by counsel to Yull's claim appears of record, the State has not carried its burden to present evidence of a valid waiver. Black v. State, 194 Ga.App. 660(1), 391 S.E.2d...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Rice v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • June 11, 1997

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT