Weaver v. State

The State's proffer showing that the victim suffered a burning sensation in his eyes and face, was in a great deal of pain and was temporarily blinded after the defendant sprayed him with pepper spray factually supported the defendant's guilty plea to aggravated assault.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Michael David Weaver, also known as Michael Carothers, pled guilty to one count of aggravated assault for spraying another man with pepper spray. Over two weeks later, Weaver filed a pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The trial court denied Weaver’s motion, and he now appeals, arguing that an insufficient factual basis exists for his plea because the State’s proffer failed to show that pepper spray is either a deadly weapon or an object, device, or instrument likely to cause serious bodily injury under OCGA § 16-5-21 a 2. We disagree and affirm.

“A ruling on a motion to withdraw a guilty plea lies within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent a manifest abuse of that discretion.” Citation and footnote omitted. Sheffield v. State, 270 Ga. App. 576, 1 607 SE2d 205 2004. Uniform Superior Court Rule 33.9 provides: “Notwithstanding the acceptance of a plea of guilty, the judgment should not be entered upon such plea without such inquiry on the record as may satisfy the judge that there is a factual basis for the plea.” The purpose of this rule “is to protect against someone pleading guilty when that person may know what he has done but may not know that those acts do not constitute the crime with which he is charged. USCR 33.9 provides this protection by requiring a trial court to subjectively satisfy itself that there is a factual basis for the plea.” Citations and punctuation omitted. Phelps v. State, __Ga.__ 1 Case No. S13A1294, decided October 21, 2013. “USCR 33.9 requires nothing more than that the trial court make itself aware of the factual basis of the plea.” Citations and punctuation omitted. Id. “And a factual basis is sufficient if it subjectively satisfies the trial court that the defendant knows both what he has done and that those acts constitute the crime with which he is charged.” Citations, punctuation and footnotes omitted. Leary v. State, 291 Ga. App. 754 1 662 SE2d 733 2008.

Weaver v. State

The State's proffer showing that the victim suffered a burning sensation in his eyes and face, was in a great deal of pain and was temporarily blinded after the defendant sprayed him with pepper spray factually supported the defendant's guilty plea to aggravated assault.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report