Antron T. Smith v. Roy Odum
This text of Antron T. Smith v. Roy Odum (Antron T. Smith v. Roy Odum) 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.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________ October 31, 2024
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A25A0542. ANTRON T. SMITH v. ROY ODUM.
Prisoner Antron T. Smith filed a pro se petition in superior court using a form to seek federal habeas relief. Smith failed to answer most of the questions on the form, indicating the questions were not applicable. Smith attached a letter to the form in which he raised multiple grievances ranging from his criminal sentence to alleged defamation. The trial court construed the filing as a civil action, which it dismissed on August 4, 2023. Smith filed a notice of appeal on July 24, 2024. We lack jurisdiction for at least two reasons. First, Smith’s appeal is untimely. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of entry of the judgment or trial court order sought to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). Here, however, Smith filed his notice of appeal 355 days after entry of the trial court’s order. The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. Ebeling v. State, 355 Ga. App. 469, 469 (844 SE2d 518) (2020). Second, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, an appeal in a civil action filed by a prisoner must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review. See OCGA § 42-12-8, cross-referencing OCGA § 5-6-35; Jones v. Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 490 (480 SE2d 24) (1997). Thus, to the extent the trial court properly construed Smith’s action as civil in nature, Smith was required to file an application for discretionary appeal. “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). For these reasons, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 10/31/2024 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Antron T. Smith v. Roy Odum, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/antron-t-smith-v-roy-odum-gactapp-2024.