Detoma v. State, 296 Ga. 90

Defendant Gary DeToma pleaded guilty to malice murder of his 5-year-old son and admitted attempted murder of his other son; State had sought death, recommended life without parole; plea resulted in life without parole and attempt count placed on dead docket.
Factual basis: DeToma suffocated Gary (pillow and/or plastic bag/duct tape) and made a failed attempt on the younger child after ingesting pills; co-worker discovered the scene and William was rescued.
After sentencing, plea counsel timely moved to withdraw the guilty plea; DeToma alleged his plea was not freely and voluntarily entered because of pressure from attorneys and family and his own emotional state.
At the plea hearing DeToma had testified he was not under influence, knew he could choose trial, denied threats or improper promises (other than the State’s recommendation), acknowledged guilt, completed and signed a waiver form, and stated he wanted to plead guilty.
At the withdrawal hearing, family and defense counsel testified DeToma expressed a desire to go to trial but was advised to accept the plea; the court found no coercion by counsel and concluded the plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
DeToma also sought to admit the court reporter’s audio recording of the plea hearing at the withdrawal hearing to show emotional nuance; the trial court excluded the recording as irrelevant and relied on the certified transcript.

Issue	DeToma's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered	He felt pressured by attorneys/family and was emotionally forced to plead; thus plea involuntary	Record (plea colloquy, signed waiver, counsel testimony) shows plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent	Plea was voluntary; trial court did not abuse discretion denying withdrawal
Whether trial court erred by excluding court reporter's audio of plea hearing	Audio would show emotional nuance indicating coercion and support withdrawal motion	Certified transcript accurately records hearing; audio not necessary or probative of voluntariness	Exclusion was not an abuse of discretion; transcript presumed true and audio added nothing material

Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969) (defendant must understand rights relinquished in plea)
King v. State, 270 Ga. 367 (1998) (State bears burden on direct review to show plea was knowing and voluntary)
Loyd v. State, 288 Ga. 481 (2011) (State may meet burden via record or extrinsic evidence showing plea was knowing and voluntary)
Walden v. State, 291 Ga. 260 (2012) (post-sentencing plea withdrawal rests in trial court’s discretion and is allowed only to correct manifest injustice)
Wright v. State, 292 Ga. 825 (2013) (summarizing standards for plea validity and withdrawal)
Woodall v. State, 294 Ga. 624 (2014) (trial court’s discretion in evidentiary rulings regarding plea records)
Shaheed v. State, 276 Ga. 291 (2003) (family pressure does not necessarily render a plea involuntary)
State v. Evans, 265 Ga. 332 (1995) (defendants commonly regret guilty pleas; regret alone does not invalidate plea)
Slakman v. State, 272 Ga. 662 (2000) (transcript is presumed to correctly report court proceedings)
Pirkle v. State, 240 Ga. App. 24 (1999) (family influence does not automatically make plea involuntary)
Walker v. State, 304 Ga. App. 55 (2010) (same principle regarding family pressure)