Pride v. Kemp
Annotate this CaseAppellant was indicted on charges of rape, aggravated assault, and two counts of cruelty to children. At issue was whether the habeas court erred by finding that appellant's guilty plea was valid in light of the multiple statements made by the trial court during the plea proceedings. The court held that the judicial participation in appellant's plea negotiations was so great as to render his guilty plea involuntary where the trial court repeatedly stated that it would impose a longer sentence if appellant went to trial and, indeed would prefer that he go to trial so that the trial judge could "give [appellant] what I would really like to give him." Accordingly, the court reversed the habeas court's denial of appellant's petition where he agreed to enter a guilty plea with terms far less favorable than those originally negotiated after hearing such statements from the trial court.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.