Betancourt v. State

6 Citing cases

  1. Covington v. State

    196 Ga. App. 498 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 6 times
    Affirming denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea when a prosecutor had adequately explained a plea agreement, including a provision that the imposition of a sentence as consecutive or concurrent would be "left up to the [c]ourt"

    Crump v. State, 154 Ga. App. 359, 360 ( 268 S.E.2d 411) (1980)." Betancourt v. State, 177 Ga. App. 738, 740 ( 341 S.E.2d 239) (1986). We find no abuse of discretion in this case.

  2. Anderson v. State

    390 S.E.2d 637 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 5 times

    "After pronouncement of sentence, a ruling on a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is within the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a manifest abuse of such discretion." Betancourt v. State, 177 Ga. App. 738, 740 ( 341 S.E.2d 239) (1986). At the time defendant offered her guilty plea, the trial court, by means of a plea statement, informed her of her rights and questioned defendant as to her understanding of the charges against her and the consequences of her plea.

  3. Thornton v. State

    349 S.E.2d 23 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)   Cited 13 times

    A person cannot avoid the legal consequences of his acts even if based on good faith reliance on the advice of counsel. Betancourt v. State, 177 Ga. App. 738, 740 ( 341 S.E.2d 239) (1986). Thus, testimony as to what appellants' counsel told them about pleading guilty would not affect the court's decision in denying the motion to withdraw the pleas of guilty.

  4. Hicks v. State

    344 S.E.2d 758 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986)   Cited 2 times

    The transcript of the hearing on appellant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty reinforces the fact that the plea of guilty was completely voluntary, and that appellant was well represented by counsel. After pronouncement of sentence, a ruling on a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is within the discretion of the trial judge and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a manifest abuse of discretion. Betancourt v. State, 177 Ga. App. 738 ( 341 S.E.2d 239) (1986). After examination of the entire transcript of the guilty plea hearing and the hearing on appellant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, we find no abuse of discretion. Appellant's enumeration of error is totally lacking in merit.

  5. Betancourt v. Willis

    814 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1987)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Betancourt, we affirmed the grant of a ยง 2254 petition in which the petitioner, Jairo Betancourt, argued that his attorneys provided ineffective assistance because of assurances they made about his sentence before he pled guilty.

    (Respondent's Exh. 4, p. 66.) In Betancourt v. State, 177 Ga. App. 738, 341 S.E.2d 239 (1986), the court stated that the misunderstanding as to the terms of the pretrial agreement was not controlling on the issue of withdrawal of Betancourt's plea of guilty. At the hearing, Betancourt confirmed that he entered his plea freely and voluntarily and understood that the court could impose the maximum sentence as a result of the guilty plea.

  6. Henry v. Jones

    No. 08-02346 (W.D. Tenn. Aug. 1, 2011)

    " McQuaig v. McLaughlin, 211 Ga. App. 723, 724(1), 726(b) ( 440 SE2d 499). "`"`"A prior and remote cause can not be made the basis of an action if such remote cause did nothing more than furnish the condition, or give rise to the occasion by which the injury was made possible, if there intervened between such prior or remote cause and the injury a distinct, successive, unrelated, efficient cause of the injury. If no danger existed in the condition except because of the independent cause, such condition was not the proximate cause." (Cit.)'" (Cit.)' Wanless v. Winner's Corp., 177 Ga. App. 738, 785(3) ( 341 SE2d 250) (1986)." Beamon v. Ga. Power Co., 199 Ga. App. 309, 312 ( 404 SE2d 463).