Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements

  1. Law
  2. Georgia Code
  3. Evidence
  4. Relevant Evidence and Its Limits
  5. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements

Checkout our iOS App for a better way to browser and research.

Except as otherwise provided by law, evidence of the following shall not, in any judicial or administrative proceeding, be admissible against the criminal defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions:

  1. A plea of guilty which was later withdrawn;
  2. A plea of nolo contendere;
  3. Any statement made in the course of any proceedings in which a guilty plea or a plea of nolo contendere was entered and was later withdrawn, vacated, or set aside; or
  4. Any statement made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which does not result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn, vacated, or set aside;

    provided, however, that the statements described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this Code section shall be admissible in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought in fairness be considered contemporaneously with it or in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the accused under oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel or after the accused voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel.

(Code 1981, §24-4-410, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.)

Cross references.

- Pleas, plea discussions, and related statements, Fed. R. Evid. 410.

Editor's notes.

- In light of the reenactment of this Title, effective January 1, 2013, the reader is advised to consult the annotations following Code Sections 17-7-93 and 17-7-95, which may also be applicable to this Code section.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Withdrawn guilty plea not admissible.

- In two cousins' trial for the murder of a drug dealer, cousin one's trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by failing to seek admission of statements that cousin two made, which exonerated cousin one, when cousin two attempted to plead guilty because under former O.C.G.A. § 17-7-93(b) (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-4-410), cousin two's withdrawn guilty plea was not admissible. Esprit v. State, 305 Ga. 429, 826 S.E.2d 7 (2019).


Download our app to see the most-to-date content.