Ricks v. State
307 Ga. 168
Ga.2019Background
- On May 4, 2012 Ashleigh Ricks, while represented by counsel, pleaded guilty to felony murder in Baldwin County and was sentenced to life imprisonment the same day.
- Later in May 2012 (same term) Ricks filed several pro se pleadings alleging her plea was involuntary and counsel was ineffective; she asked to appeal and to have her charge reduced.
- In June 2012 Ricks filed a pro se motion seeking permission to proceed pro se and for plea counsel to withdraw; the record contains no written order granting that request.
- The next superior court term began July 9, 2012; in August 2012 Ricks filed additional pro se motions (new trial, change of venue) after the term ended.
- New counsel ("motion-to-withdraw counsel") represented Ricks at an October 5, 2012 hearing and the trial court, in an order dated November 20, 2012, denied the motions on the merits.
- The Georgia Supreme Court held the May pro se filings were nullities (because Ricks was still represented), the August filings were untimely for withdrawing a plea, and therefore the trial court should have dismissed the motions rather than decide them on the merits; the court vacated the judgment and remanded with instructions to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of pro se filings submitted during same term while represented | Ricks contended her pro se filings should allow withdrawal of plea or sentence reduction | State maintained filings were invalid because Ricks remained represented and lacked authority to file pro se | Filings were nullities; a represented defendant cannot file pro se during same term and the court should have dismissed them |
| Effect of absence of written order permitting counsel withdrawal before pro se filings | Ricks argued later substitution/representation changes and hearing arguments cured any defect | State argued no written order relieving counsel existed at time of filings, so filings were inoperative | Court held absence of an order meant Ricks was represented when she filed; subsequent advocacy could not revive inoperative pleadings |
| Timeliness / jurisdiction to seek withdrawal of plea after term expiration | Ricks argued August filings should be considered and allowed withdrawal | State argued the court lost jurisdiction after the term ended and the motion was untimely | Filings made after the term expired were untimely to seek plea withdrawal; court lacked jurisdiction to grant them and should have dismissed |
| Proper procedural disposition—dismissal vs. merits decision | Ricks argued the court properly adjudicated merits and denied relief on substance | State argued motions were either nullities or untimely and should be dismissed, not litigated on merits | Court: motions should have been dismissed; because trial court decided on merits, its order was vacated and remanded with directions to dismiss |
Key Cases Cited
- Gillen v. Bostick, 234 Ga. 308 (prematurity of notice of appeal does not divest appellate court of jurisdiction)
- White v. State, 302 Ga. 315 (a trial court lacks jurisdiction to grant a motion to withdraw a plea after the term in which judgment was entered has ended)
- Brooks v. State, 301 Ga. 748 (untimely motion to withdraw plea must be dismissed rather than denied on the merits)