New v. GeorgiaAnnotate this Case
Petitioner pled guilty to computer and electronic exploitation charges, for which he received a twenty-year sentence in prison, with eighteen to serve. He applied for habeas relief, challenging the voluntariness of his guilty plea. To facilitate his habeas claims, petitioner filed a pro se motion in his criminal case seeking production of the record and other documents. Petitioner filed another pro se motion to compel the production, claiming certain agencies subject to the order did not comply. The trial court determined petitioner had counsel, and dismissed the motion to compel for that reason. The Georgia Supreme Court determined that whether petitioner was represented by counsel was not evident in the record. In fact, petitioner represented that he filed his habeas corpus complaint pro se, and that one of his grounds for habeas relief was ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The Supreme Court remanded this case back to the Court of Appeals for confirmation of whether petitioner was represented by counsel; if not, the appellate court was directed to consider other substantive issues raised in petitioner’s application for discretionary appeal.