Darrell Eugene Younger v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Darrell Eugene Younger v. State

DecidedFebruary 9, 2023

DocketA23D0225

StatusPublished

This text of Darrell Eugene Younger v. State (Darrell Eugene Younger 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

Darrell Eugene Younger v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 09, 2023

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A23D0225. DARRELL EUGENE YOUNGER v. THE STATE.

In 2010, Darrell Eugene Younger pleaded guilty to armed robbery, cruelty to children in the first degree, and burglary. In November 2022, Younger filed a pro se “motion to set aside a void judgment,” arguing that the indictment was not returned in open court, the indictment was defective, and that the armed robbery and burglary counts should have merged. The trial court dismissed the motion, and Younger filed this pro se discretionary application. We lack jurisdiction. Younger’s challenges are an attack on his convictions. See Thompson v. State, 304 Ga. 146, 149 (3) (816 SE2d 646) (2018) (“Appellant claims that his convictions are void because the record does not show that his indictment was returned in open court.”); Jones v. State, 290 Ga. App. 490, 494 (2) (659 SE2d 875) (2008) (holding that challenges to the indictment “are essentially attempts to vacate a judgment of conviction”). See also Williams v. State, 287 Ga. 192, 193-194 (695 SE2d 244) (2010) (a merger claim is a challenge to a criminal conviction). The Supreme Court, however, has made clear that a motion seeking to challenge an allegedly invalid or void judgment of conviction “is not one of the established procedures for challenging the validity of a judgment in a criminal case” and that an appeal from the denial of such a motion is subject to dismissal. Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532 (690 SE2d 150) (2010); see also Weaver v. State, 359 Ga. App. 784, 785 (1) (860 SE2d 96) (2021) (“a motion to vacate an allegedly void conviction is an improper mechanism in which to collaterally attack a conviction”). Because Younger is not authorized to collaterally attack his convictions in this manner, this application is hereby DISMISSED. See Roberts, 286 Ga. at 532; Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 218 (2) (686 SE2d 786) (2009).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/09/2023 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,____________________ February 09, 2023

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A23D0225. DARRELL EUGENE YOUNGER v. THE STATE.

In 2010, Darrell Eugene Younger pleaded guilty to armed robbery, cruelty to children in the first degree, and burglary. In November 2022, Younger filed a pro se “motion to set aside a void judgment,” arguing that the indictment was not returned in open court, the indictment was defective, and that the armed robbery and burglary counts should have merged. The trial court dismissed the motion, and Younger filed this pro se discretionary application. We lack jurisdiction. Younger’s challenges are an attack on his convictions. See Thompson v. State, 304 Ga. 146, 149 (3) (816 SE2d 646) (2018) (“Appellant claims that his convictions are void because the record does not show that his indictment was returned in open court.”); Jones v. State, 290 Ga. App. 490, 494 (2) (659 SE2d 875) (2008) (holding that challenges to the indictment “are essentially attempts to vacate a judgment of conviction”). See also Williams v. State, 287 Ga. 192, 193-194 (695 SE2d 244) (2010) (a merger claim is a challenge to a criminal conviction). The Supreme Court, however, has made clear that a motion seeking to challenge an allegedly invalid or void judgment of conviction “is not one of the established procedures for challenging the validity of a judgment in a criminal case” and that an appeal from the denial of such a motion is subject to dismissal. Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532, 532 (690 SE2d 150) (2010); see also Weaver v. State, 359 Ga. App. 784, 785 (1) (860 SE2d 96) (2021) (“a motion to vacate an allegedly void conviction is an improper mechanism in which to collaterally attack a conviction”). Because Younger is not authorized to collaterally attack his convictions in this manner, this application is hereby DISMISSED. See Roberts, 286 Ga. at 532; Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 218 (2) (686 SE2d 786) (2009).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/09/2023 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)

Darrell Eugene Younger v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darrell-eugene-younger-v-state-gactapp-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack