Clarence Strickland v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 19, 2014
DocketA15A0002
StatusPublished

This text of Clarence Strickland v. State (Clarence Strickland 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
Clarence Strickland v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 19, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0002. CLARENCE STRICKLAND v. THE STATE.

Clarence Strickland was convicted of aggravated sodomy, and we affirmed his conviction on appeal. See Strickland v. State, 311 Ga. App. 400 (715 SE2d 798) (2011). He subsequently filed a pro se motion, requesting copies of pre-trial transcripts and case records at the government’s expense. The trial court dismissed the motion on December 30, 2013, and Strickland filed this direct appeal on May 21, 2014. We lack jurisdiction for two reasons. First, the appeal is untimely. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the entry of the trial court’s order. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction upon this Court. Couch v. United Paperworkers Intl. Union, 224 Ga. App. 721 (482 SE2d 704) (1997). Here, Strickland filed his notice of appeal 142 days after the trial court’s order was entered. Second, the trial court’s order is not subject to direct appeal. “[I]f no petition for habeas corpus is pending at the time an indigent prisoner makes any application for a transcript . . . for purposes of collateral attack upon his conviction or sentence, that application will be treated as a separate civil action subject to the procedures and requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996. Specifically, appeals from the denial of any such application for free transcripts for post-conviction collateral attack must comply with the discretionary appeal procedures of OCGA § 5-6-35.” Coles v. State, 223 Ga. App. 491, 492 (1) (477 SE2d 897) (1996); see OCGA § 42- 12-8. Strickland’s failure to follow the discretionary appeal procedure deprives us of jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 09/19/2014 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 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

Coles v. State
477 S.E.2d 897 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Couch v. UNITED PAPERWORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION
482 S.E.2d 704 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Clarence Strickland v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clarence-strickland-v-state-gactapp-2014.