Beasley v. GeorgiaAnnotate this Case
John Beasley filed a pro se appeal of the denial of his amended motion for an out-of-time appeal following the entry of guilty pleas for felony murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime. Beasley argued that: (1) his trial counsel was ineffective; (2) his pleas were not voluntary because he was not informed that intent was an element of the crimes to which he pled; (3) the trial court erred in entering an order of nolle prosequi to the aggravated assault count, and then accepting his guilty plea in a felony murder count predicated on the act of aggravated assault; and, (4) the trial court should have, sua sponte, inquired into his competency before accepting his pleas. With the exception of the claim that the trial court should have sua sponte inquired into his competency, Beasley raised these same grounds of alleged trial court error in his prior petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The habeas court denied his request for relief, which precluded the Supreme Court’s consideration of all of these issues under the doctrine of res judicata.