 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hermann v. State5/8/2001
Jeffrey James Hermann was charged with a violation of the Georgia Controlled Substance Act for possession of marijuana. OCGA § 16-13-30. Hermann entered a guilty plea pursuant to OCGA § 16-13-2 (a), so that he would be conditionally discharged as a first offender. The state recommended the following negotiated sentence to the court: "twelve months probation, four days to serve with credit for time already served, a $500 fine, forty hours of community service, and random drug screens." The court informed Hermann that he would also be required to attend sixteen Narcotics Anonymous ("NA") or Alcoholics Anonymous ("AA") meetings, participate in a drug risk reduction program, submit to an evaluation, and obtain any treatment deemed necessary. Hermann told the court that he understood the additional conditions, and the court accepted his guilty plea.
At the hearing, the court sentenced Hermann as follows:
You will have twelve months probation; attend sixteen AA meetings; you will have four days to serve; you'll report at 7 p.m. on [September 15], which is Friday at the jail to serve the balance of your jail time; you get credit for any hours already served. You will have [OCGA §] 16-13-2 treatment. You will complete the DUI drug risk reduction program. I'm going to do something different in the place of that. This will be less expensive. I'm not going to order the DUI drug risk reduction program. I am going to order a drug evaluation and any outpatient treatment that is recommended. This will be done by Ed Pierce. This will be less expensive than the other thing. You will pay a $500 fine; you'll have random drug screens; you'll have forty hours community service, and court costs.
Subsequently, the court reduced the sentence to writing. According to the written sentence, Hermann was required to pay the following: a $25 fee, as required by OCGA § 42-8-34; a fee of fifty percent of his $500 fine, according to OCGA § 15-21-100; and a probation supervision fee of $38 per month.
Hermann filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. At the motion hearing, Hermann testified that a course of treatment involving at least seventeen counseling sessions was recommended after his drug evaluation, and that the sessions would cost $66 per week, thus imposing a large financial burden. The court denied the motion, and Hermann filed this appeal. We affirm.
" fter a sentence is pronounced, as here, permission to allow the withdrawal of a guilty plea lies within the trial court's sound discretion, and the court's discretion will not be disturbed unless that discretion is manifestly abused." Dalton v. State, 244 Ga. App. 203, 205-206 (2) (534 SE2d 523) (2000).
Hermann argues that the court erred by denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, because he was not properly advised of the conditions of his probation. Essentially, Hermann challenges his sentence, based on the surcharges and fees it involves, and argues that he was not adequately informed of the financial burden associated with the terms of his probation.
We conclude that the trial court did not manifestly abuse its discretion in denying Hermann's motion. First, the court did not have the discretion to add or suspend the mandatory charges of which Hermann complains. OCGA § 15-21-100 provides in pertinent part that "there shall be imposed as an additional penalty a sum equal to 50 percent of the original fine" when a court imposes a fine for any offense involving the possession of marijuana. Likewise, OCGA § 42-8-34 (d) (2) provides for a mandatory $25 fee when a defendant is put on probation.
More importantly, the unanticipated costs associated with Hermann's sentence did no
Page 1 2 Georgia DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|