Charlie Branner, Jr. v. State

Summary

The Georgia Court of Appeals vacated the denial of Charlie Branner, Jr.'s motion to withdraw his guilty plea and remanded with direction to dismiss the motion. The court held that Branner's pro se motion was a legal nullity because he remained represented by counsel, and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the matter after the relevant term of court expired.

Holdings

1. A criminal defendant in Georgia may not represent himself while simultaneously represented by counsel; therefore, a pro se motion filed while counsel remains of record is unauthorized and without legal effect.
2. A trial court lacks jurisdiction to permit withdrawal of a guilty plea once the term of court in which the defendant was sentenced has expired.
3. When the trial court lacks jurisdiction to decide a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, it must dismiss the motion rather than deny it on the merits.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a pro se motion filed by a criminal defendant who remains represented by counsel is authorized and legally effective.
2. Whether the trial court retains jurisdiction to permit withdrawal of a guilty plea after the term of court in which the defendant was sentenced has expired.
3. Whether the trial court should dismiss, rather than deny on the merits, an unauthorized and jurisdictionally defective motion to withdraw a guilty plea.

Disposition

vacated