Schoicket v. State, 312 Ga. 825

Rebecca Dawn Schoicket pleaded guilty in October 2016 to felony murder and related charges and was sentenced to life plus five years.
In December 2017 she filed pro se for an out-of-time appeal and a motion to withdraw her guilty plea; appointed counsel later sought leave to file an otherwise-untimely withdrawal motion.
The trial court granted an out-of-time appeal but denied leave to file the late motion to withdraw the guilty plea; counsel filed the withdrawal motion anyway and Schoicket appealed the denial of leave.
Central legal question: whether a granted out-of-time appeal permits a defendant to file an otherwise-untimely motion to withdraw a guilty plea (i.e., whether the post-conviction process is "started anew").
The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the denial of leave (holding an out-of-time appeal does not authorize an untimely motion to withdraw a plea) but vacated the 10-year sentence on Count 7 (tampering with evidence) and remanded for resentencing because that offense, when committed with respect to one’s own case, is a misdemeanor.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a granted out-of-time appeal authorizes filing an otherwise-untimely motion to withdraw a guilty plea	Schoicket: Collier/Ponder/Maxwell treat an out-of-time appeal as restarting post-conviction, so she may file the late withdrawal motion	State: Common-law rule limits motions to withdraw pleas to the term of sentencing; untimely plea-withdrawal motions must proceed via habeas; Kelly narrowed Ponder/Maxwell to avoid unwarranted windfalls	Held: No — a granted out-of-time appeal does not permit an otherwise-untimely motion to withdraw a guilty plea; trial court did not err; habeas is the proper remedy
Whether Schoicket’s 10-year concurrent sentence for tampering with evidence (Count 7) was proper	Schoicket: sentence challenged as erroneous because tampering with evidence of one’s own crime is a misdemeanor	State: concedes error	Held: Vacated Count 7 sentence and remanded for resentencing (tampering with one’s own case is misdemeanor)

Collier v. State, 307 Ga. 363 (2019) (recognized and developed the out-of-time-appeal procedural vehicle)
Ponder v. State, 260 Ga. 840 (1991) (language permitting post-conviction remedies after out-of-time appeal, including motion for new trial)
Maxwell v. State, 262 Ga. 541 (1992) (applied Ponder language that out-of-time appeal may "start the post-conviction process anew")
Kelly v. State, 311 Ga. 827 (2021) (narrowed Ponder/Maxwell: out-of-time appeal restores the defendant to the position at forfeiture but does not automatically start post-conviction process anew)
Neal v. State, 232 Ga. 96 (1974) (held habeas corpus provides the adequate/exclusive remedy for a frustrated right to appeal)
Davis v. State, 274 Ga. 865 (2002) (motions to withdraw guilty plea filed after the term of sentencing are generally untimely and belong in habeas)
Brooks v. State, 301 Ga. 748 (2017) (motions to withdraw pleas must be filed in the term of sentencing)
Fairclough v. State, 276 Ga. 602 (2003) (described grant of out-of-time appeal as the "functional equivalent of the entry of judgment")
Byers v. State, 311 Ga. 259 (2021) (tampering with evidence concerning one’s own crime is a misdemeanor)