George Allen McCutchen was charged with malice murder, three counts of felony murder, two counts of armed robbery, one count of burglary, and three counts of aggravated assault. He pled guilty to one count of felony murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. In exchange for the guilty plea, the State agreed to enter a nolle prosequi on the other charges and not to oppose parole after 14 years. Shortly thereafter, McCutchen retained new counsel who filed a motion to withdraw the guilty plea, which the trial court denied. McCutchen appeals,1 contending that the guilty plea was void because his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance in failing to confer with him or to investigate exculpatory or mitigating evidence. To prevail on this claim, McCutchen “must show that his lawyer’s performance was deficient and that, but for his errors, there is a reasonable probability he would have insisted on going to trial. Cit.” Ellis v. State , 272 Ga. 763, 764 1 534 SE2d 414 2000. See also Hill v. Lockhart , 474 U. S. 52, 59 106 SC 366, 88 LE2d 203 1985. The trial court specifically found that McCutchen did not establish that defense counsel failed to confer sufficiently with him or to seek and consider testimony from co-indictee Marcus Zurita, or that there was a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s alleged errors, McCutchen would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial. This court gives deference to the trial court’s factual findings, unless clearly erroneous, but independently applies the legal principles to the facts to determine the merits of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Cit. There is a strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. Cit. Sedlak v. State , 275 Ga. 746, 751 3 SE2d 2002.
The fact that trial counsel or his associate met with McCutchen “for an amount of time claimed to be inadequate is not dispositive, as there exists no magic amount of time which counsel must spend in actual conference with his client. Cit.” Morgan v. State , 275 Ga. 222, 228 10 564 SE2d 192 2002. At the hearing on the motion to withdraw, the testimony of defense counsel contradicted that of McCutchen and family members regarding the nature and quantity of consultation with them. The trial court was authorized to resolve this dispute in favor of the State and to find that McCutchen failed to carry his burden of showing that the consultation was deficient. Drew v. State , 256 Ga. App. 391, 393 2 a 568 SE2d 506 2002. See also Romano v. State , 272 Ga. 238, 239 2 527 SE2d 184 2000; Swantner v. State , 244 Ga. App. 372, 374 2 a 535 SE2d 343 2000. Compare Cochran v. State , 262 Ga. 106, 107 2 a 414 SE2d 211 1992.
