Court Opinion

ID: 9573883
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:00:10.968852+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:30.798712
License: Public Domain

POPE, Presiding Judge,
concurring specially.
I fully concur in all of the opinion.
Nevertheless, I write separately to emphasize the importance of assuring that a defendant is fully informed of the provisions of the First Offender Act during negotiations regarding a guilty plea, or after conviction at trial. As the opinion correctly notes, in Griffin v. State, 244 Ga. App. 447 (535 SE2d 783) (2000), this court determined that in the absence of a request by the defendant there was no requirement that the trial court inform the defendant of the provisions of the First Offender Act. Thus, it is advisable that defendant’s counsel explain first offender treatment to the defendant before the court determines the sentence.
In the instant case, it is not clear from the record before us whether Gibson was even eligible for first offender treatment. Furthermore, Gibson does not claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform him of the provisions of the Act; it is unclear from the record whether defense counsel imparted this information to Gibson. Because this case does not squarely present the issue regarding defense counsel’s responsibility, my concern here is solely to emphasize that the defense attorney should thoroughly present this information to his client.