Christopher Conley v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 15, 2017
DocketA18A0172
StatusPublished

This text of Christopher Conley v. State (Christopher Conley v. State) 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
Christopher Conley v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 08, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A18A0172. CHRISTOPHER CONLEY v. THE STATE.

On January 29, 2010, Christopher Conley was convicted of one count of incest and six counts of child molestation and sentenced to fifty years in prison and ten years on probation. On July 17, 2017, Conley filed a motion to modify his sentence. The trial court summarily denied the motion, and Conley filed a timely notice of appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal, whichever is later. Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 347-348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010); Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 118 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). Once this statutory period expires, as it has here, a trial court may modify a sentence only if it is void. Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669, 670 (604 SE2d 483) (2004). And a direct appeal may lie from the denial of a motion to modify or correct a sentence only if the defendant raises a colorable claim that the sentence is void. Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 119 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). But a sentence is void only when the trial court imposes a punishment that the law does not allow. Coleman v. State, 305 Ga. App. 680, 680-681 (700 SE2d 668) (2010). Here, Conley does not argue that the trial court imposed a punishment that the law does not allow; rather, he claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. This is a challenge to his convictions, not his sentence. Because Conley has not raised a colorable argument that his sentence is void, the trial court’s denial of his motion is not subject to direct appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/08/2017 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

Jones v. State
604 S.E.2d 483 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Frazier v. State
691 S.E.2d 247 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2010)
Burg v. State
676 S.E.2d 465 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Coleman v. State
700 S.E.2d 668 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Christopher Conley v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-conley-v-state-gactapp-2017.