Rolland v. Martin, 281 Ga. 190

637 S.E.2d 23 (2006) · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 30, 2006 · No. No. S06A1632

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia held that a verified habeas corpus petition may serve as both a pleading and evidence in a pro se habeas proceeding. Because Rolland’s petition sufficiently alleged that trial counsel failed to file a motion for new trial or notice of appeal after being instructed to do so, the court reversed the denial of habeas relief and remanded for a full consideration of the merits.

Holdings

  1. A sufficiently verified habeas corpus petition serves as both a pleading and evidence and may create an issue of fact concerning counsel's failure to file a motion for new trial or notice of appeal.
  2. The denial of habeas corpus relief was erroneous because the habeas court was required to consider the verified petition as evidence, hear the case fully, and determine its merits under applicable law.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a verified habeas corpus petition may serve as evidence supporting the petitioner's ineffective-assistance claim.
  2. Whether the habeas court erred by denying relief without considering the factual allegations in Rolland's verified petition and conducting a full hearing on the merits.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (14)

  • State v. Jaramillo, 279 Ga. 691, 693(2), 620 S.E.2d 798 (2005)(followed)
  • Mitchell v. Forrester, 247 Ga. 622, 623, 278 S.E.2d 368 (1981)(followed)
  • BEA Systems v. WebMethods, 265 Ga. App. 503, 504, 595 S.E.2d 87 (2004)(followed)
  • Mountain Bound v. Alliant FoodService, 242 Ga. App. 557, 560(3), 530 S.E.2d 272 (2000)(followed)
  • Heaton v. Lemacks, 266 Ga. 189(2), 466 S.E.2d 7 (1996)(followed)
  • Spires v. Relco, 165 Ga. App. 4, 5(2), 299 S.E.2d 58 (1983)(followed)
  • Accredited Assoc. v. Shottenfeld, 162 Ga. App. 575, 576(1), 292 S.E.2d 417 (1982)(followed)
  • Foskey v. Smith, 159 Ga. App. 163, 164, 283 S.E.2d 33 (1981)(followed)
  • Harvard v. Walton, 243 Ga. 860, 862(2), 257 S.E.2d 280 (1979)(followed)
  • Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 477(II)(A), 120 S. Ct. 1029, 145 L. Ed. 2d 985 (2000)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 14.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Georgia Supreme Court