THI RD DI VI SI ON

BA RNES, P. J.

, BOGGS and BRA NCH, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s /

M ar ch 30, 2015



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 4 A1 68 2 . KELLEY v . THE STATE.

B O G G S , J u d g e.

Terry Kel l ey ap p eal s fo l lo wi n g t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f th e St at e’ s “ Mo t i o n to

Set As i d e an Il leg al J u dg m en t .” Th e co u rt g ran t ed t h e m o ti o n o n t h e b as i s t h at i t was

wi t h o u t au t h o ri t y to s en t en ce Kel l ey t o a l es s er sen t en ce t h an t h at reco m m en d ed by

t h e St at e as p art of a n eg o ti at ed p l ea t o a red u ced ch arg e. Becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt erred

i n gran t i n g t h e St at e’ s m o ti o n

, we rev ers e an d rem an d t h i s cas e wi t h di rect i o n fo r t h e

t ri al co u rt t o re-en t er t h e o ri g i n al ju d g m en t o f co n v i ct i on an d s en t en ce.

Fo r t h e fo ll o wi n g reas on s

, we c o n cl ud e t h at wh i l e a d ef en d a nt can wi t h d raw

a n eg ot i at ed p l ea if t h e t r i al co u rt d eci des t o im p o s e a lo ng er s en t en ce t h an t h at

reco m m en d ed b y t h e St at e, see Un i fo rm Su p eri o r C o u rt Ru l e 33 .1 0

, t h ere i s n o

co m p arab l e au t h o ri t y al l owi n g fo r t h e S t a t e t o wi t h d raw i t s o ffer i f t h e co u rt i n d i cat esi t i n t en d s t o s en t en ce t h e d efen d an t t o l es s t i m e t h an reco m m en d ed

, an d i t i s n o t fo r

t h i s co u rt t o ju di ci al l y

creat e s uch a ri g ht o u t o f wh o l e cl o t h

.

Th e reco rd rev eal s t h at K e lle y was i n d i ct ed al on g wi t h t h ree o t hers an d ch arg ed

wi t h fel o n y m

u rd er an d o t h er cri m es fo r h is al leg ed p art i ci pat i o n i n an arm ed ro b b ery

at t em p t th at res u l t ed i n t h e d eat h o f a fi ft h p art ici p an t

. In an Oct o b er 5, h eari n g

, t h e

St at e an n o u n ced : “ t h i s i s a p l ea reg ard i n g t h e d efen dan t.” A ft er t h e tri al co u rt

q u es ti o n ed Kel l ey reg ard i ng t h e v o lu n t ari n es s o f h i s p l ea, t h e St at e i nfo rm ed t h e t ri al

co u rt th at “ as a co n di t i o n o f t h e p l ea

. . . Kel ley m u s t t es t i fy t ru t h fu ll y

i n t h e t ri al o f

[h i s co -d efen d an t s] .” Up o n p ro v i d i n g a p ro ffer fo r t h e fact u al b a s i s o f t h e p l ea, t h e

p ro s ecu to r s t at ed , “ Yo u r h o n o r, we as k t h at y o u accep t t h i s n eg ot i at ed p l ea. I k n o w

t h at [Kel l ey ] d o es n o t h av e an y fel o n y co n vi ct i o n s an d s o I’ m s u re [d efen se co u n s el ]

wi l l req u es t fi rs t o ffen d er b u t t h e St at e wo u l d o b ject to th at b u t t h at ’ s u p t o t h e co u rt .”

Th e St at e al s o a g r e e d t o n o l p ro s th e rem ai n in g ch arg es ag ai n s t Kel l ey an d

reco m m en d t o t he co u rt a 2 0 -y ear s en t en ce. An d

, aft er s om e d i s cu ss i on co n cern i n g

t h e red u ced ch arg e t h e S t a t e offered t o Kel l ey as p art o f th e pl ea ag reem en t

, t h e

p art i es ag reed t h at Kel l ey was p l e a d i ng gu i lt y t o a red u ced ch arg e o f v o l u n t ary

m an s l au g h t er.

2Fo l l owi n g t h e co u rt ’ s co l l o q u y w ith K e l le y r e ga r ding his ple a

, K e ll ey p res en t ed

h i s fat her, h i s g ran dm ot h er, an d t h e Di rect or o f t he J u d i ci al Serv i ce Ho u s e Arre s t

Serv i ces as ch aract er wi t n es s es . Th e co u rt t h en ru l ed :

I’ m go i n g to accep t t h i s p l ea as b ei n g freel y

, vo l u n t ari ly

, an d

k n o wi n g l y en t ered wi t h a fact u al b as is t h erefo r[ ]

.

I’ m g o i n g t o s en t en ce M r. Kel l ey

. . . to t h e red u ced ch arg e t o

v o l u n t ary m an s l au g h t er an d t h e fact o rs t h at th e co u rt

- - t h ere’ s a

s u b s t an t i al fact u al b as i s fo r m i t i gat i on i n t hi s p art icu l ar cas e.

Fi rs t b ei ng th at t h e d efen d an t h as ad m i t t ed h is i n v o l v em en t i n t h i s

m at t er an d h as p l ed t o i t w i t h o u t res erv at i o n

. He ap p ears t o be g en u i n el y

rem o rs efu l ab o u t h i s co n d u ct

. . .

So t h e co u rt wi ll s en t en ce M r. Kel ley as fo l l o ws : Sen t en ce hi m t o

t en y ears t o s erv e fi v e y ears

, t h e b al a n c e p r o b at ed an d s tay away fro m

t h e v i ct i m s an d t es ti fy t ru t h fu l l y i n an y m at t er i n v o l vi n g t h i s cas e.

Th e St at e i m

m ed i at el y req u es t ed p erm i s si o n t o ap p ro ach t h e b en ch

, an d

, aft er an o fft h e-reco rd co n fe r e n ce b et ween t h e co u rt an d b o t h co u ns el

, t he fo l lo wi n g co l l o q uy

o ccu rred :

[Th e St at e ] : Yo u r Ho n o r, I un d ers t an d t h e co u rt h as n o w i m p o s ed a

s en t en ce l es s th an wh at was ag reed t o o n t he neg o ti at e d p l e a t h at th e

St at e was as k i n g fo r.

3. . .

Th e Co u rt : Th i s i s o ff t h e t ri al cal en d ar. Th i s i s a n o n -n eg o t i at ed pl ea

reg ard l es s o f wh at

- - wh et h er o r n o t t h e d e f e n d a n t an d t h e St at e

n eg o t i at ed s o m et h i n g

, t h i s i s - - t h e co urt h as t h e l as t s ay reg ard l es s

. So

g o ah ead

.

[Th e St at e] : Yes

, Yo u r Ho n o r. An d t h e St at e i s req ues t i n g t h at t h i s pl ea

n o t b e tak en an d b e wi t h d rawn an d t h at t h e St at e p ro ceed wi th t ri al w i t h

M r. Kel l ey

n ex t week

.

Th e Co u rt : Ok ay

. Th e co u rt d ecl i n e s t o d o t h at

. T he s en ten ce s t an ds

.

An d I’ m m ak i ng t h i s p u rs u an t t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t he Fi rs t Offen d er

Act

.

Du ri n g a s h o rt b reak in th e h eari n g

, t h e St at e fi l ed a “ M o t i o n t o Set As i d e an Il l eg al

J u d g m en t .” Th e co u rt n ev ert h el es s en t ered a ju d g m en t o f co n vi ct i o n an d s en t en ced

Kel l ey t o a t en -y ear t erm

.

A l i t t l e o v er a m o nt h l at er, o n No v em b er 1 3 , 2 0 1 2 , t h e t ri al co u rt g ran t ed t h e

St at e’ s m o t i o n

, ag reei n g w i th t h e St at e t h at wh en i t reject ed th e n eg o t i at ed p l ea, i t h ad

n o au t h ori t y t o s en t en ce Kel l ey t o a l es ser o ffen s e n o t ch arg ed i n t h e i n d i ct m en t

, an d

t h er e f o r e t he ju d g m en t was i l leg al an d m u s t b e s et as i d e. See OCGA § 1 7 -7 -9 3 (a)

(u p o n arrai g n m en t

, t h e p ers o n accu s ed of co m m i t t i n g cri m e s h al l an s wer wh et h er h e

4i s g u il t y o r n o t g u i l t y o f o ffen s e ch arg ed wh ich an s wer or p l ea s h al l b e m ad e o ral l y ).

Ci t i n g Bo s t i c v. S t a t e

, 1 8 4 G a. Ap p

. 5 0 9 (3 6 1 SE2 d 8 7 2 ) (1 98 7 ), t h e co u rt h el d t h at

“ [a] b s en t a n eg ot i at ed p l ea fo r a red u ced ch arg e n o t i n cl u d ed i n t h e i n d i ct m en t

c o n s e n t e d t o b y t h e St at e, a d efen d an t can p l ea o n ly t o t h e ch arg es as s tat ed i n t h e

i n d i ct m en t

. ” See id

. at 5 1 1 (4 ) (n o au t h o ri t y al l o wi n g fo r a n on -n eg o ti at ed pl ea t o an

o ffen s e o t h er t h an t h at ch arg ed i n i n d i ct m en t). On M ay 6, 2 0 1 3

, t he t ri al c o u r t r es en t en ced Kel l ey

t o 2 0 y ears as o ri g in al l y

reco m m en ded b y

t h e St at e.

Kel l ey n o w ap p eal s

, as s ert i ng t h at t he t ri al co u rt erred i n g ran t i n g t he St at e’ s

m o ti o n t o s et as i d e t h e o ri g in al ju d g m en t o f co nv i ct i o n an d s en t en ce. 1 W e ag ree.

H e r e

, t h e t ri al co u rt was u n d er t h e i m p res s i o n t hat it s reject i o n o f t h e St a t e ’s

reco m m en d ed s en t en ce co nv ert ed t h e n eg o t i at ed p lea i n t o a n o n -n eg o t iat ed p l ea.

Du ri n g t h e h eari n g o n t h e p l ea, t h e t ri al co u rt as s ert ed t h at i t was s en t en ci n g o n a n o n

n eg ot i at ed p l ea, b ut t h en d en i ed t h e St at e’ s req u es t t o wi t h d raw i t s offer. W h i l e t h e

co u rt ’ s ex p l an at i on w as co n f u s i n g

, t he reco rd refl ect s t h at th e co urt accep t ed m o s t

t erm s o f th e p l ea ag reem en t

. It req u i red Kel ley t o t es t i fy ag ai n s t h i s co -d efen d an t s t h e

fo l l o w i n g week

, an d n o l p r o s s ed t he rem ai n i n g ch arg es

, as t h e St at e an d Kel l ey

ag reed

.

1 Kel l ey d oes n o t s eek t o wi t h d raw h i s g u i l t y p l ea.

5“ A t ri al ju d g e has wi d e d i s cret io n t o accep t o r reject a n e g o t i at ed p l ea.”

(Ci t at i o n an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i tt ed .) Ba rb er v. S t at e

, 3 1 6 G a. Ap p. 7 0 1

, 7 0 2 n .4 (7 3 0

SE2 d 1 7 6) (2 0 1 2). If t h e t ri al co u rt ch o o s es t o reject a p l ea ag reem en t

,

t h e t ri al co u rt s h al l

, o n t he reco rd

, i n fo rm t h e defen d an t p ers o n al ly t hat

(1 ) t h e t ri al co urt i s n ot b o u n d b y an y p lea ag reem en t ; (2 ) t h e t ri al co u rt

i n t en d s t o reject th e p l ea ag reem en t p res en t l y b efo re i t ; (3 ) th e

d i s p o s i t i o n o f th e p res en t cas e m ay b e les s fa v o r ab le t o t he d efen d an t

t h an t h at co n t em

p l at ed b y t h e p l ea ag reem en t ; an d (4 ) t h at t he d efen d an t

m ay t h en w i t hd raw h i s o r h er g u i l t y p l ea as a m at ter of ri g h t

. If t h e pl ea

i s n o t t h en wi t h d rawn , s en t en ce m ay b e p ro n o u n ced

.

Un i fo rm Su p eri o r Co u rt Ru l e 3 3.1 0

. Th i s ru l e has b een i n t e r p r et ed t o i n cl u d e

s i t u a t i o n s in wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt ex p res s ed an i n t en t i o n t o reject t h e s en t en c e

reco m m en d ed b y t h e St at e an d i m p o se a hars h er s en ten ce. See, e. g

., Mu l key v. S t a t e

,

2 6 5 Ga. Ap p

. 6 31

, 6 3 1-6 3 2 (5 9 5 SE2 d 3 3 0) ( 2 0 0 4 ) ( t r i al co u rt i m p o s ed h ars h er

s en t en ce t h an t h at reco m

m en ded b y St at e); La wr en ce v. St a t e

, 2 3 4 G a. A p p

. 6 0 3

, 6 0 4

-

6 0 5 (1 ) (5 0 7 SE2 d 4 9 0 ) (1 9 9 8) (s am e). It ap p ears here, as i n Mu l key

, s u p ra, t h e t ri al

co u rt accep t ed t he p l ea ag re e m e n t i n l arg e p art

, reject i n g o n l y t h e s en t en ce

reco m m en d ed b y t h e St at e. Co m p are Ma n ley v. S t a t e

, 2 8 7 G a. Ap p

. 35 8

, 35 9 (1 ) (6 5 1

SE2 d 4 5 3 ) (2 0 0 7 ) (n o t h i n g i n reco rd s h o wi n g a n eg o t i at ed pl ea; reco rd i n d i cat ed o n l y

o p en -en ded p l ea wi t h a s en t en ce reco m m en d at i o n fro m St at e). In d eed

, t h e cri m e wi th

6wh i ch t o ch arg e a d efen d an t is wi t h i n t h e ex cl u s iv e p u rv i ew o f t he St at e, wh i l e t h e

s en t en ce t o b e im

p o s ed wi t h reg ard t o a ch arg e i s w i t hi n t h e ex cl u s i v e p ro vi nce o f t h e

t ri al co u rt u n les s t h at d i s cret io n h as b een rem o v ed b y s tat u t e. 2

Co n trary t o t h e St at e’ s arg u m en t s h ere, we ha v e s t a t ed th at t h e t ri al co urt ’ s

reject i o n o f a reco m

m en d ed s en t en ce p u rs uan t t o a n eg o t i at ed p l ea a g reem en t d o es

n o t g i v e t h e St at e t h e ri g h t o f wi t h d rawal fro m t h e p l ea ag reem en t

. St a t e v. Ha r p er

,

2 7 9 Ga. Ap p

. 6 20

, 62 0 -6 2 1 (2 ) (6 3 1 SE2 d 8 2 0 ) (2 0 0 6 ), ov erru l ed i n p art o n o t h er

g ro u nd s

, S t a t e v. Ki n g

, 3 2 5 Ga. Ap p

. 4 4 5 (7 5 0 SE2 d 7 5 6 ) (2 01 3 ); co m p are Lewi s v.

S t a t e

,

_ _ _ G a. Ap p

.

_

_ _ (1 ) (Cas e No

. A1 4 A1 3 2 0 ; d eci d ed Oct o b er 2 3

, 2 0 14 ) (co u rt

erred in i m

p o s i n g h ars h er s en t en ce aft er accep ti ng St at e’ s s en t en ce reco m m en d at i o n

an d aft er d efen d an t

, i n rel i an ce u p o n co u rt ’ s accep t an ce, w ai v ed Fi rs t Am en d m en t

ri gh t s an d t es t i fi ed o n b eh al f o f St at e). As we n ot ed i n Ha r p er

,

[t ] h e St at e arg u es t h at i t s h o ul d h av e t he sam e ri g ht of wi t h d rawal as th e

d efen d an t

, b u t co n ced es t h at Geo rg i a l aw g i v es t h e [S] t at e n o s u ch ri g ht

.

Th e [S] t at e h as o ffered n o arg um en t wh i ch p ers u ad es t h i s Co u rt t h at th e

t ri al co u rt erred i n n ot affo rd i ng t o t h e [S] t at e t h e s am e ri g h t ex pres s l y

affo rd ed a d efen d an t p u rs u an t t o Ger ma n y an d i t s p ro g en y

.

2 To u s u rp t h e au t h ori ty o f t h e t ri al co urt w i th reg ard t o s e n t en ci n g i n t h i s

s y s t em o f ch eck an d b al an ces wo ul d o b v i a t e t h e n e ed fo r t h e co u rt to co n s i d er

ev i d en ce an d ci rcu m s t an ces t h at wo u l d m i t i g at e p u n i sh m en t

.

7Id

. at 6 2 1 (2 ). A d di t i o n al l y

, as i n th i s cas e

, H a r p e r e n t ered a g u i l t y p lea t o a l es s er

o ffen s e n o t ch arg ed i n th e i n d i ct m en t

. Id

. at 6 2 0

. Becau s e t he St at e was b o un d b y t h e

p o rt i on o f t h e p l ea ag reem en t accep t ed by th e t ri al co u rt wi t h n o ri g ht o f w i t hd rawal

,

we can n o t co n cl ud e t hat t h e n eg o t iat ed p l ea was co n vert ed i n t o a n o n -n eg o t i at ed p l ea,

an d t h e St at e h as p o in ted t o n o au t h o ri ty req u i ri n g t hi s Co u rt t o arri v e at a d i fferen t

co n cl u s i o n

. Th e co urt ’ s accep t an ce o f th e p lea ag reem en t i n p art an d t h e ju d g m en t o f

co n vi ct i o n an d s en t en ce i m p o s ed t hereo n were t h erefo re n o t il l eg al

. See OCGA § 1 7

-

1 0 -1 (a) (1 ) (u po n a v erd i ct o r pl ea o f g u i l t y

, j u d ge fi xi n g sen t en ce sh al l p res cri be a

d et erm i n at e s en t en ce wi th i n t h e m i n i m u m an d m ax i m

u m sen t en ces al l o w ed b y l aw).

OCGA § 1 6 -5 -2 (b ) (p u n i s h m en t fo r v o lu n tary m an s lau g h ter n o t l es s t h an o n e n o r

m o re t h an 2 0 y ears ). W e are b o u n d b y o u r cas el aw an d co n st rai n ed b y th e ab s en ce o f

s t at u to ry au t h o ri t y o r U n i f o r m Su p eri o r Co u rt Ru l e g i v i ng t h e St at e a ri g h t to

wi t h d raw an o ffer i n t h is o r i n an y o t h er ci rcu m s t an ce. Th e r e m e d y t h e St at e s eek s

m u st b e ad d res s ed

, i f i t i s t o b e ad d res s ed at al l

, b y t h e l eg i s lat u re an d n o t t h e

ju d i ci ary

.

Becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt m is t ak en l y b el i ev ed th at i t i m po s ed an i l l eg al ju d g m en t

,

we rev ers e t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f t h e St at e’ s m o ti o n t o v acat e an d rem an d t h i s cas e

8wi t h d irect i o n fo r t h e t ri al co urt t o re-en ter t h e o ri g i nal ju d g m en t o f co n v i ct i o n an d

s en t en ce.

Ju d g men t r ever

s ed . Ba r n es , P. J., a n d Br a n ch , J., co n cu r

.

9