Court Opinion

ID: 9585495
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:01:05.839998+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:48:57.512807
License: Public Domain

Birdsong, Presiding Judge,
dissenting.
Although concurring fully in the dissent, I write separately to express my view that the issue raised should not be addressed because appellant’s plea of nolo contendere waived any issue about the denial of his motion. See Hooten v. State, 212 Ga. App. 770 (1) (442 SE2d 836) (1994). While Hooten is not yet in effect, this court has never expressly approved conditional pleas of nolo contendere (see Gordy Tire Co. v. Dayton Rubber Co., 216 Ga. 83, 89 (114 SE2d 529)), and we should no longer consider issues allegedly preserved by these pleas.
I respectfully dissent. I am authorized to state that Chief Judge *750Pope and Judge Andrews join in this dissent.