Anthony-Vincent Cartman v. State of Georgia

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Anthony-Vincent Cartman v. State of Georgia

DecidedJuly 26, 2021

DocketA21A1617

StatusPublished

This text of Anthony-Vincent Cartman v. State of Georgia (Anthony-Vincent Cartman v. State of Georgia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anthony-Vincent Cartman v. State of Georgia, (Ga. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ July 26, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1617. ANTHONY-VINCENT CARTMAN v. STATE OF GEORGIA.

Anthony-Vincent Cartman, who previously was convicted of one or more criminal offenses, filed a pleading purporting to be a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, in which he raised several challenges to the validity of one or more of his prior convictions. The trial court dismissed the petition, and Cartman filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Pleadings, motions, and orders must be construed according to their substance and function and not merely as to their nomenclature. Planet Ins. Co. v. Ferrell, 228 Ga. App. 264, 266 (491 SE2d 471) (1997); accord State v. Hasson, 334 Ga. App. 1, 3 (1) (778 SE2d 15) (2015). Although styled as a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, Cartman’s pleading, in essence, seeks to vacate one or more of his prior convictions as void.1 However, “a petition to vacate or modify a judgment of conviction is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case.” Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 218 (1) (686 SE2d 786) (2009). Any appeal from an order denying or dismissing such a petition or motion must be dismissed. See Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532

1 A petition for a writ of error coram nobis is “the ancestor of an extraordinary motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence.” State v. Carrion, 327 Ga. App. 296, 297 (758 SE2d 632) (2014) (punctuation omitted). In his petition, Cartman neither sought a new trial nor pointed to any newly discovered evidence. (690 SE2d 150) (2010); Harper, 286 Ga. at 218 (2). Consequently, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 07/26/2021 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ July 26, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1617. ANTHONY-VINCENT CARTMAN v. STATE OF GEORGIA.

Anthony-Vincent Cartman, who previously was convicted of one or more criminal offenses, filed a pleading purporting to be a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, in which he raised several challenges to the validity of one or more of his prior convictions. The trial court dismissed the petition, and Cartman filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Pleadings, motions, and orders must be construed according to their substance and function and not merely as to their nomenclature. Planet Ins. Co. v. Ferrell, 228 Ga. App. 264, 266 (491 SE2d 471) (1997); accord State v. Hasson, 334 Ga. App. 1, 3 (1) (778 SE2d 15) (2015). Although styled as a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, Cartman’s pleading, in essence, seeks to vacate one or more of his prior convictions as void.1 However, “a petition to vacate or modify a judgment of conviction is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case.” Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 218 (1) (686 SE2d 786) (2009). Any appeal from an order denying or dismissing such a petition or motion must be dismissed. See Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532

1 A petition for a writ of error coram nobis is “the ancestor of an extraordinary motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence.” State v. Carrion, 327 Ga. App. 296, 297 (758 SE2d 632) (2014) (punctuation omitted). In his petition, Cartman neither sought a new trial nor pointed to any newly discovered evidence. (690 SE2d 150) (2010); Harper, 286 Ga. at 218 (2). Consequently, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 07/26/2021 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Anthony-Vincent Cartman v. State of Georgia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anthony-vincent-cartman-v-state-of-georgia-gactapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack