*1 where have no jurisdiction jurisdic- itself invest us with tion over It our to ensuing appeal. “duty is raise and resolve ques- [our] tions to whenever pertaining jurisdiction there is doubt con- cerning whether such exists.” jurisdiction (Emphasis supplied.) Assn., Homes 271 Ga. Redfearn Huntcliff remand, I dissent to the judgment just of reversal and I previously dissented to the untimely application certificate of cause. has not probable Jurisdiction existed at time case, this Court’s consideration during up including to and today’s decision.
I am authorized to state that Justice Hines in this dissent. joins Bruce Harvey, appellant. S. Howard, Jr., Hart,
Paul L. District Attorney, Bettieanne C. Peggy Katz, Baker, R. Assistant District Attorneys, Attorney Thurbert E. General,
S00A1898. THE STATE v. COLACK.
Per curiam. of the court below is affirmed judgment pur- without opinion
suant to Supreme Court Rule 59. concur, JJ,
All the Justices except Carley who dissent. Justice, dissenting.
Carley, In this alien is resident who habeas sought because, relief to corpus prior pleading guilty charge by of theft he was not shoplifting expressly advised that deportation possible consequence was a of his The habeas court plea. granted petition, majority and the affirms that order pursuant this Court’s I erred, Rule 59. Because conclude that I habeas dissent. The exclusive that specified seq. Thus, OCGA 9-14-40 et OCGA 9-14-41. it was incumbent upon the habeas court to find a denial of state or constitu- federal (a); tional the writ. OCGA rights before Parker v. Abernathy, the grant whether, entirely upon habeas relief this case depends guilty plea, resident alien has the that, by pleading guilty, be informed he becomes possi- bility of deportation. that a defendant be
There is no constitutional guilty plea. consequences” Wil of his of certain “collateral advised 212) (1999) (parole Duffy, eli liams v. gibility). immigration plea a defendant’s status The effect of the consequence. A resident alien’s collateral such a involuntary he he was unaware that *2 “rendered deported. (2d [Cits.]” Santelises, 509 F2d 704 States v. United 1975). statutory only is the of such a source Cir. (c). provisions § the mandate that a defend Since of OCGA constitutionally based, it is not a valid so is not ant be informed Abernathy, supra. grant ground v. the of habeas relief. Parker for (c) applicable § event, in Moreover, OCGA 17-7-93 pleas Assembly expressly provisions to limited its the General only govern pro July accepted the 1, 2000. “Statutes that on or after expressed given an retroactive effect absent of the courts are cedure intention to the contrary. (Emphasis supplied.) [Cit.]” State, Barner v. 484) (1993). (4) (434 certainly can SE2d 263 Ga. not raise mination to make OCGA 17-7-93 nal defendant 367 objection express legislative deter constitutional (c) prospective only, since a crimi proceeding only guaranteed in conducted at the time of his trial. See accordance with the 263) (1947). State, SE2d When he was Ford v. Ga. statutory requirement, otherwise, or that he be tried, there was no deported. advised that he be in that it would
The habeas court seems to have acted the belief miscarriage justice it rule See OCGA 9- of were otherwise. (d). “miscarriage justice” only concept However, 14-48 the of of procedural excusing default, and is an for the defendant’s not basis independent ground relief. See Valenzuela v. 370) (1985). A Newsome, 793, 796 habeas court anything grant prisoner upon relief to a based other than injustice. Vasquez, manifest See Gavin v. (407 assuming Moreover, even that a habeas court statutory that OCGA 17- were authorized to consider violations and (c) applied retroactively, qual- the circumstances still would not 7-93 miscarriage justice ify application exception. See Gunter (5) (2), Hickman, 316-317 Ga. my opinion, majority’s opinion In failure to issue a written the only affirming grant the of habeas relief to Petitioner can be such a explained by complete any precedent support absence controlling authority clearly disposition. Indeed, establishes that the holding that a resident alien has the constitu- habeas court erred tional him the that his will to be informed By summarily possible deportation. sanction of additional major- affirming the erroneous of habeas relief of similar ity encourages filing petitions. unauthorized I dissent.
amI authorized to state that Thompson joins Justice this dis- sent. 22, 2001. Solicitor, Blaney, Kwiatkowski,
Gerald N. P. Jeffrey Emilien O. Loiselle, Jr., Solicitors, Assistant for appellant.
David S. Lipscomb,
S00A1996. GRIER v. THE STATE. Justice. Dewayne Carlos Grier was convicted aby jury of felony underlying aggravated assault; aggra- vated assault other unknown persons; possession of a firearm *3 in the commission felony.1 of a On Grier trial appeal, asserts that statements, his erroneously admitted custodial and he was that denied effective assistance of trial Finding counsel. no reversible error, we affirm. verdict, in a
Viewing light evidence most favorable to the girlfriend, Wilson, find the following: Grier’s Lanissa was shot in head and killed driving occupied by while a vehicle Grier and four men. other Just to the Wilson drove the shooting, group Grier, convenience store to to fill with purchase cigars marijuana. seat, who was seated the front left the car passenger to make purchase. car, police As he into the got back officer began the vehicle approach. occupants they became anxious because marijuana had weapon and a their Wil- possession. Consequently, son from the sped away convenience store. direction,
At Grier’s Wilson turned onto street which was 18,1999, August May The crimes occurred on 1998. An indictment was returned on charging underlying felony aggravated Grier with on the assault; aggravated persons; possession assault on unknown com other firearm in the felony; possession mission and of a firearm felon. was convicted The final count August 23,1999, guilty dead-docketed. Trial commenced on and a verdict of was returned remaining August 25, day three counts on 1999. Grier was sentenced that to life same imprisonment, plus totaling years. consecutive sentences A motion for new trial was 10, 1999, 17, 2000, timely September April filed on amended on and denied June on appeal July 10, 2000. Grier’s notice of filed was on 2000. The case was docketed in this Court 22, 2000, August was submitted for decision on briefs October