Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

GENTRY v. THE STATE.

JOHNSON, Presiding Judge.

Claude Gentry was tried before a jury and convicted of aggravated assault and possessing a firearm during the commission of a felony. He moved for a new trial, alleging, among other things, that his trial counsel was ineffective, although his written motion did not specify how his counsel's performance was deficient. An evidentiary hearing was held on Gentry's motion, after which the trial court entered an order denying the motion without explanation.

Gentry now appeals from that order, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. However, no transcript of the hearing on the motion for new trial was made. Absent a transcript, we must presume that Gentry failed to meet his burden of proving the ineffectiveness of his trial counsel and that the trial court correctly denied the motion for new trial on this ground. The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

See Tate v. State, 230 Ga. App. 186, 189(5) ( 495 S.E.2d 658) (1998); Jackson v. State, 205 Ga. App. 827, 829(3) ( 424 S.E.2d 6) (1992).

Judgment affirmed. Eldridge and Mikell, JJ., concur.

JOHNSON, Presiding Judge.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 2, 2003.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

GENTRY v. STATE
(Sep 2, 2003)