HOOKS v. THE STATE., 233 Ga. 149, 210 S.E.2.d 668 (1974)
Linked as:
Summary
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Gunter, J., who dissents.
Summary
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Gunter, J., who dissents.
Text
Yancey & Perkins, Carson Dane Perkins, Jack Greenberg, David Evan Kendall, Peggy C. Davis, Anthony G. Amsterdam, for appellant.
This rape case is here by appeal and for mandatory review because the death sentence was imposed upon the defendant following his plea of guilty. The defendant, John Wesley Hooks, was charged with committing the offense of rape on July 13, 1973; he was indicted by a grand jury of Cook County on October 1, 1973; and, following a plea of guilty on December 10, 1973, the death sentence was imposed by the trial judge. The basic facts of the case are essentially the same as those set forth in Eberheart v. State,
After the defendant's plea of guilty was entered, the prosecution presented the testimony of the victim and two deputy sheriffs who investigated the offense. The plea of guilty was accepted and after hearing evidence, the trial judge found aggravating circumstances and imposed the death sentence. Held:
1. Appellant first contends in this appeal: "(6) That the entire jury selection process in Cook County, Georgia, is tainted as evidenced by the name of one of Cook County's Jury Commissioners appearing on said jury list"; "(8) that there existed a systematic exclusion of Negroes from the Grand Jury of Cook County, Georgia, which is unconstitutional on its face"; and, "(10) that there existed a systematic exclusion of females from the Grand Jury in Cook County, Georgia, which is unconstitutional on its face."
Appellant pleaded guilty to the offense of rape. A review of the hearing transcript shows that the plea of guilty was entered freely, voluntarily and knowingly with the benefit of counsel. It is, therefore a valid plea of guilty. [1] See Bailey v. Baker,
2. Appellant also contends that the state erred by presenting evidence in aggravation at the pre-sentence hearing without giving him any prior notice as required by Code Ann. 27-2534. This court has held that: "The bifurcated trial was created to withhold matters inadmissible on the issue of guilt or innocence from the jury until that issue has been determined. The statute is clear that the pr&sentence hearing is for additional evidence and in no way excludes from consideration on sentence the matters heard on the issue of guilt or innocence." Eberheart v. State,
3. The appellant also argues that the "court further
erred in refusing to declare unconstitutional Georgia Act 74 (1973) in that it is cruel and unusual punishment and provides for the discretionary imposition of the death penalty under the rule of Furman v. Georgia, 408 U. S. 238 (1972)."
The constitutionality of the statute under attack was upheld in Coley v. State,
4. An additional enumeration of error urged by appellant is that "The court erred in overruling appellant's petition to Change Venue (R 39) and erred by rendering appellant's sentence under the influence of passion and prejudice."
In his petition to change venue, appellant alleged "that petitioner will be unable to get a fair trial by an impartial jury in said county."
The appellant, in open court prior to acceptance of his guilty plea, affirmatively indicated that he understood that he had the right to a trial by jury with respect to this offense and stated that he did not want to be tried by a jury. He thereby waived any claim to a change of venue. There is no showing that the trial judge acted under the influence of passion or prejudice and we find no merit in this contention.
6. The death sentence was imposed in this case by the trial judge without the intervention of a jury. The present statute does not require a jury determination for imposition of the death sentence. We have reviewed the sentence in accord with Ga. L. 1973, p. 159 et seq. (Code Ann. 27-2537 (c) (1-3)), as we did in Coley v. State,
We have compared the evidence and sentence in this case with other similar cases and conclude the sentence of death is not excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in those cases. Those similar cases we considered in reviewing the case are listed in the appendix attached to this opinion.
The transcript and record before us reveal that the conviction and sentence are not contrary to law, and there is ample evidence, in addition to the plea of guilty, to support the trial court's judgment. The judgment of the trial court will, therefore, be affirmed.
Similar Cases Considered by the Court: Miller v. State,
1974
Notes:
1. Before accepting the guilty plea, the trial court
Sponsored links
This document cites
- U.S. Supreme Court - Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (per curiam) (1972)
- Supreme Court of Georgia - BAILEY v. BAKER., 232 Ga. 84, 205 S.E.2.d 278 (1974)
- Supreme Court of Georgia - HOUSE v. THE STATE., 232 Ga. 140, 205 S.E.2.d 217 (1974)
- Supreme Court of Georgia - EBERHEART v. THE STATE., 232 Ga. 247, 206 S.E.2.d 12
- Supreme Court of Georgia - FORD v. THE STATE., 232 Ga. 511, 207 S.E.2.d 494
See other documents that cite the same legislation
