Mitchell v. State, 633 S.E.2d 539 (Ga. 2006). · Go Syfert
Mitchell v. State, 633 S.E.2d 539 (Ga. 2006). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the right to a free transcript arises regardless of whether the indigent defendant was represented by retained counsel at the time of the trial court proceeding for which the transcript is sought.”
43 citation events (43 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Roberson v. the State (gactapp, 2016-02-18)
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007 2016 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Roberson v. the State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: cf. · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
the right to a free transcript arises regardless of whether the indigent defendant was represented by retained counsel at the time of the trial court proceeding for which the transcript is sought.
examined Cited as authority (rule) Curtis Lee Rogers v. State (3×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
(Citations and punctuation omitted.) Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802, 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Leila Norman v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
The fact that Norman is indigent, and therefore entitled to a transcript at public expense, Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802, 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006), does not relieve her of the obligation to properly request the transcript and cause it to be filed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Schoicket v. State
Ga. · 2018 · confidence medium
It is true that “an indigent, on appeal, is entitled as a matter of right to a free copy of the transcript of trial court proceedings in which he has been a party.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802, 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Henderson v. State
Ga. · 2018 · confidence medium
It is well established that “an indigent, on appeal, is entitled as a matter of right to a free copy of the transcript of trial court proceedings in which he has been a party.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802, 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Roberson v. State
Ga. · 2017 · confidence medium
In reaching this conclusion, we do not forget that “an indigent, on appeal, is entitled as a matter of right to a free copy of the transcript of trial court proceedings in which he has been a party.” Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802, 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006) (citation and punctuation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Roberson v. State
Ga. · 2017 · confidence medium
In reaching this conclusion, we do not forget that “an indigent, on appeal, is entitled as a matter of right to a free copy of the transcript of trial court proceedings in which he has been a party.” Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802, 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006) (citation and punctuation omitted).
discussed Cited "see" Kristopher Adam Brock v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802 (2) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006). 2.
discussed Cited "see" Jerome Saair Lawson v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See, in particular, Court of Appeals Rule 23 (b) (stating that “[a] brief shall be filed by the appellee in all criminal appeals when the State is the appellee”). 5 280 Ga. 802 ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006). 6 Id. at 802 (1) (citations and punctuation omitted). 7 Id. at 802 (2). 5 receipt of the transcript to refile their notices of appeal,” and ordered that “upon the filing of such notices of appeal, the cases with the complete record and transcript may be transmitted to this Court for redocketing.” 8 In the instant case, although Lawson has been appointed counsel for purposes of appeal, …
discussed Cited "see" Singleton v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mitchell, supra, 280 Ga. at 802 (1).
discussed Cited "see" Leslie Singleton v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mitchell, 13 supra, 280 Ga. at 802 (1).
discussed Cited "see" Coleman v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Nye v. State, 279 Ga. App. 347, 348 (1) ( 631 SE2d 386 ) (2006) (“[i]n the absence of a transcript, we generally presume that the trial court acted properly”). 4 (Citations omitted.) Mitchell v. State, 280 Ga. 802 (1) ( 633 SE2d 539 ) (2006). 5 See Hall v. State, 162 Ga. App. 713, 716 (4) ( 293 SE2d 862 ) (1982) (on remand, trial court ordered to hold a hearing to determine if appellant was an indigent person entitled to a transcript).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Shannon Leavell v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2015 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Mitchell, 280 Ga. at 802 (2).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Leavell v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2015 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Mitchell, 280 Ga. at 802 (2).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MITCHELL
v.
THE STATE (Four Cases)
S06A0766-S06A0769.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jul 14, 2006.
633 S.E.2d 539
Michael B. King, for appellant., Scott L. Ballard, District Attorney, Josh W. Thacker, Assistant District Attorney, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Hunstein.
Cited by 18 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 65%
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Georgia (1)
HUNSTEIN, Presiding Justice.

Appellants Marvin and Melvin Mitchell were convicted of the felony murder of Jason Trotman and other charges and sentenced to life imprisonment. After a hearing on their post-trial motions, including claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, the trial court declared appellants to be indigent and appointed counsel for purposes of appeal. The court, however, denied their requests for free copies of the transcript of post-trial proceedings. Appellants contend in case numbers S06A0767 and S06A0769 that the trial court’s denial of their requests for a free transcript was error. We agree and reverse.

1. In criminal cases, “[a]n indigent, on appeal, is entitled as a matter of right to a free copy of the transcript of trial court proceedings in which he has been a party.” Stalling v. State, 231 Ga. 37, 38 (200 SE2d 121) (1973), citing Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U. S. 12, 19 (76 SC 585, 100 LE 891) (1956) (indigent criminal defendant entitled to trial transcript at public expense). Motions for new trial and other post-trial motions are part of the “proceedings” contemplated by this rule. See Hall v. State, 162 Ga. App. 713 (4) (293 SE2d 862) (1982). The right to a free transcript arises regardless of whether the indigent defendant was represented by retained counsel at the time of the trial court proceeding for which the transcript is sought. See id.

The trial court here found appellants to be indigent for purposes of appeal and our own review of the record demonstrates that the transcript of appellants’ post-trial evidentiary hearing is necessary to allow them to pursue their pending appeals from their criminal convictions. See Stalling, supra at 38 (noting absence of pending appeal in upholding trial court’s denial of motion for transcript); Billups v. State, 234 Ga. 147 (214 SE2d 884) (1975) (indigent defendant must show justification or need for transcript to be entitled to free copy). Accordingly, we conclude that the court erred by denying appellants’ requests for a free transcript of the post-trial proceedings and reverse the decision of the trial court in case numbers S06A0767 and S06A0769.

2. Having determined that appellants were denied their right to free copies of the transcript of post-trial proceedings, their appeals from their convictions in case numbers S06A0766 and S06A0768 are removed from the docket and remanded to the trial court while the transcript is completed. Appellants shall have 20 days from the date of receipt of the transcript to refile their notices of appeal, and upon the filing of such notices of appeal, the cases with the complete record and transcript may be transmitted to this Court for redocketing.

[*803] Decided July 14, 2006. Michael B. King, for appellant. Scott L. Ballard, District Attorney, Josh W. Thacker, Assistant District Attorney, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Judgments reversed in Case Nos. S06A0767and S06A0769. Case Nos. S06A0766 and S06A0768 are stricken from the docket.

All the Justices concur.