Cottros v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cottros v. State

268 S.E.2d 355, 154 Ga. App. 243, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2104

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 7, 1980

Docket59043

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 268 S.E.2d 355 (Cottros 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

Cottros v. State, 268 S.E.2d 355, 154 Ga. App. 243, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2104 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Sognier, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of theft of an automobile. On appeal, his sole enumeration of error is that the trial court erred in considering 11 untried indictments against appellant for sentencing purposes. The trial judge stated thát were it not for the 11 outstanding indictments he would sentence appellant as though the offense were a misdemeanor. However, in view of the outstanding indictments, the trial court imposed the minimum sentence for a felony. As we pointed out in Minis v. State, 150 Ga. App. 671 (5) (258 SE2d 308) (1979), where a similar factual situation existed on sentencing, this was error. As Minis is controlling under the circumstances of this case, we find it necessary to remand for resentencing.

Judgment affirmed in part; remanded for resentencing.

Deen, C. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

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

Sognier, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of theft of an automobile. On appeal, his sole enumeration of error is that the trial court erred in considering 11 untried indictments against appellant for sentencing purposes. The trial judge stated thát were it not for the 11 outstanding indictments he would sentence appellant as though the offense were a misdemeanor. However, in view of the outstanding indictments, the trial court imposed the minimum sentence for a felony. As we pointed out in Minis v. State, 150 Ga. App. 671 (5) (258 SE2d 308) (1979), where a similar factual situation existed on sentencing, this was error. As Minis is controlling under the circumstances of this case, we find it necessary to remand for resentencing.

Judgment affirmed in part; remanded for resentencing.

Deen, C. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 S.E.2d 355, 154 Ga. App. 243, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 2104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cottros-v-state-gactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack