From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Houston v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jun 18, 1981
282 S.E.2d 777 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)

Opinion

62159.

DECIDED JUNE 18, 1981.

Probation revocation. Charlton Superior Court. Before Judge Hodges.

John B. Adams, for appellant.

C. Deen Strickland, District Attorney, W. Fletcher Sams, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.


The defendant appeals the order revoking his probation. Held:

Defendant's sole enumeration of error is that the trial court erred in denying his motion for continuance. It is contended that the revocation hearing should have been continued until final disposition of the charges which formed the basis to revoke his probation. It is urged that the defendant might have to testify in the revocation hearing which testimony could then be used against him in the criminal trials; thus forcing him to incriminate himself.

We find this ingenious contention nonmeritorious. It is now established law that a court need not stay the revocation proceedings until after the disposition of the criminal charges on which revocation is sought. Dickerson v. State, 136 Ga. App. 885 ( 222 S.E.2d 649); Jackson v. State, 140 Ga. App. 659 ( 231 S.E.2d 554); Evans v. State, 153 Ga. App. 764 ( 266 S.E.2d 545). The defendant could testify or decline to testify as he saw fit; holding the revocation proceedings first did not amount to a forbidden compulsion. In any case, there was no reason to require the grant of a continuance.

Judgment affirmed. McMurray, P. J., and Pope, J., concur.

DECIDED JUNE 18, 1981.


Summaries of

Houston v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jun 18, 1981
282 S.E.2d 777 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
Case details for

Houston v. State

Case Details

Full title:HOUSTON v. THE STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Jun 18, 1981

Citations

282 S.E.2d 777 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
282 S.E.2d 777

Citing Cases

Hayes v. State

When the state does not wish to compel a defendant to testify, it is up to the defendant to decide whether he…