Opinion
46193.
SUBMITTED MAY 5, 1971.
DECIDED OCTOBER 1, 1971.
Extraordinary motion for new trial. Baldwin Superior Court. Before Judge Jackson.
William Lee, pro se. George D. Lawrence, District Attorney, for appellee.
Petitioner brought what is denominated an "extraordinary motion to vacate sentence and judgment." The motion alleged that a conviction entered against him over 3 years prior to the filing of such motion was illegal because counsel employed by petitioner's family to defend him failed to properly represent him and tendered in his behalf a plea of guilty contrary to his desires and without his authorization. The trial judge entered an order dismissing the "extraordinary motion." Appeal was taken from that order. Held:
"A motion to set aside a verdict and judgment is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case." Waits v. State, 204 Ga. 295 ( 49 S.E.2d 492). The motion in the case sub judice cannot be considered as an application for a writ of habeas corpus since it was not filed in the county of the petitioner's detention ( Beavers v. State, 117 Ga. App. 801 ( 161 S.E.2d 891); Ramirez v. State, 223 Ga. 815 ( 158 S.E.2d 238)), nor does the motion meet the requirements of a writ of error coram nobis ( South v. State, 72 Ga. App. 79 ( 33 S.E.2d 23); Harris v. State, 225 Ga. 458 ( 169 S.E.2d 331)), or an extraordinary motion for new trial. See Bishop v. State, 117 Ga. App. 93 ( 159 S.E.2d 477); Huguley v. State, 120 Ga. App. 332 ( 170 S.E.2d 450). Furthermore, under the ruling of Hatfield v. State, 119 Ga. App. 110 ( 166 S.E.2d 431), and Archer v. Clark, 202 Ga. 229 ( 42 S.E.2d 924), the grounds of the "extraordinary motion" were without merit and the trial judge did not err in dismissing it.
Judgment affirmed. Jordan, P. J., and Evans, J., concur.