Court Opinion

ID: 9573893
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:00:16.367239+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:38.265654
License: Public Domain

Carley, Judge,
concurring specially.
I fully concur with Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the majority opinion. With regard to Division 6 of the majority opinion dealing with ineffective assistance of counsel, I agree that the procedure set forth in Smith v. State, 255 Ga. 654 (3) (341 SE2d 5) (1986) is applicable and should be followed. However, I disagree with the portion of Division 6 vacating the judgment of the court below and with the judgment line to the extent that the judgment of the trial court is vacated. While I agree that the case must be remanded with direction, I believe that, as in Smith, the judgment should be affirmed subject to that remand with direction. Accordingly as in Smith, the judgment line in this case should be: Judgment affirmed and case remanded with direction. See also Hambrick v. State, 256 Ga. 141 (344 SE2d 639) (1986).
*516Robert E. Keller, District Attorney, Deborah Benefield, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.