Mims v. State
299 Ga. 578
Ga.2016Background
- In 1985 Furman Mims pleaded guilty to murder and kidnapping and received consecutive life sentences; in 2013 he moved for leave to take an out-of-time appeal claiming defects in plea acceptance and that counsel failed to advise him of the right to appeal.
- The trial court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing, concluding the existing record refuted Mims’s claimed errors and that any timely appeal would have failed.
- Mims alleged five defects: (1) he was not advised of his privilege against self-incrimination; (2) he was not advised of his confrontation right; (3) no factual basis was established for the plea; (4) the plea was induced by promises of leniency; and (5) the plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
- The record included a signed written plea/acknowledgment-and-waiver-of-rights form, counsel’s certification that the form was reviewed with Mims, a contemporaneous plea-court order referencing the form, and a plea colloquy in which the judge recited the indictment and questioned Mims about understanding charges, sentencing exposure, promises, and voluntariness.
- The trial court and Supreme Court of Georgia concluded that the written form plus certification and plea colloquy established that Mims was advised of constitutional rights, that a factual basis existed, that no impermissible plea promise induced the plea, and that the plea was knowing and voluntary.
Issues
| Issue | Mims’s Argument | State/Trial Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether record shows Mims was advised of privilege against self-incrimination and right of confrontation | The plea transcript does not show the judge advised him of those rights; form signatures disputed | Written waiver form, counsel certification, and contemporaneous order show Mims was advised and understood those rights | The record (form + certification + order) sufficed to show advisement; claim fails |
| Whether a factual basis for the guilty plea was laid on the record | No factual basis was placed on the record to support the plea | Judge recited allegations of the two counts of the indictment, and Mims confirmed understanding and intent to plead | Recitation of indictment allegations provided an adequate factual basis; claim fails |
| Whether plea was induced by impermissible promises of leniency | Mims points to alleged assurances by law enforcement about reduced exposure | Plea transcript shows judge asked about promises; Mims denied anyone promised a lighter sentence; written form shows prosecutor recommended consecutive life terms | Record refutes an undisclosed promise of leniency; claim fails (habeas, not out-of-time appeal, for extra facts) |
| Whether plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary | Mims asserts overall that plea was not valid (including references to alleged mental impairment) | Record shows counsel present, advice given, colloquy on rights, sentencing exposure, literacy, intoxication, and Mims’s statements of free will | Record sustains voluntariness and knowing nature; claim fails (any additional factual claims belong in habeas) |
Key Cases Cited
- Rowland v. State, 264 Ga. 872 (remedy of out-of-time appeal when effective assistance denied)
- Stephens v. State, 291 Ga. 837 (standard for assessing out-of-time appeals and when evidentiary hearing is required)
- Burch v. State, 293 Ga. 816 (out-of-time appeal availability when issues can be resolved from the record)
- Hagan v. State, 294 Ga. 716 (limits on out-of-time appeal after guilty plea)
- Smith v. State, 253 Ga. 169 (issues on guilty-plea appeal limited to existing record)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard applied to appellate-right claims)
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (constitutional protections that must be waived by a guilty plea)