Trauth v. State, 295 Ga. 874

Trauth pled guilty to malice murder on August 2, 2006; police found his wife murdered after a recording referenced suicide and murder.
Trauth moved to withdraw his guilty plea November 14, 2006; new counsel filed amended motion March 1, 2007, after appointing counsel.
Record shows Trauth gave his attorneys additional details about the murder; he preferred trial to go forward despite potential defenses.
Trial court denied the motion to withdraw; counsel withdrew; Trauth, indigent, was improperly not informed of right to appointed appellate counsel for first appeal.
Habeas court granted out-of-time direct appeal and permitted post-conviction remedies; Roberts remedy to pursue second, out-of-time direct appeal.
On appeal, the court affirmed the denial of the motion to withdraw; discussed proper remedy for denial of counsel and analyzed trial- and post-conviction counsel claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Remedy for denial of counsel on first appeal	Trauth argues improper denial requires new appeal with counsel.	State contends proper remedy is limited to post-conviction relief and not a new direct appeal.	Appointing counsel for a brand-new out-of-time appeal is the proper remedy.
Effectiveness of first-appeal counsel remedy	Ineffective appellate counsel on first appeal warrants relief.	No remedy if counsel’s ineffectiveness is on a prior appeal when no new counsel fixed it.	Remedy is a new direct appeal, not a new trial, when deprived of counsel on first appeal.
Ineffective assistance claim regarding trial counsel	Trial counsel failed to call witnesses and misled about defenses.	Record shows defenses discussed; claim not reviewable without proper hearing.	Ineffective-assistance claim not reviewable on out-of-time appeal without a proper hearing.
Motion to withdraw guilty plea	Counsel errors deprived Trauth of viable defenses such as voluntary manslaughter.	Counsel adequately informed about defenses; plea withdrawal denied properly.	Trial court did not err; sufficient information and strategy supported denial.
Remand to develop the record	Record needed further development, possibly including Dr. Davis’s report.	No error, remand unnecessary.	Remand denied; no additional record needed.

Roberts v. Caldwell, 230 Ga. 223 (1973) (indigent entitled to appointed appellate counsel on direct appeal)
Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353 (1963) (right to appointed counsel for appeal)
Swenson v. Bosler, 386 U.S. 258 (1967) (need for counsel when appealing as indigent)
Reagan v. Reagan, 221 Ga. 173 (1965) (grant of new appeal effect on proceedings)
Milliken v. Stewart, 276 Ga. 712 (2003) (remedy for appellate counsel ineffectiveness is new trial)
Richards v. State, 275 Ga. 190 (2002) (not entitled to second direct appeal after conviction affirmed on first appeal)
Nelson v. Hall, 275 Ga. 792 (2002) (ineffective appellate counsel showing requirements)
Chatman v. State, 265 Ga. 177 (1995) (out-of-time appeal requires appropriate post-conviction motion)
Weems v. State, 268 Ga. 142 (1997) (whether self-defense is within jury's ken)
Johnson v. State, 282 Ga. 96 (2007) (competence of advice about defenses and viability)
Rios v. State, 281 Ga. 181 (2006) (standard for reviewing withdrawal of guilty plea)