David Copeland v. Emory L. Palmer

Court of Appeals of Georgia

David Copeland v. Emory L. Palmer

DecidedFebruary 26, 2019

DocketA19A1313

StatusPublished

This text of David Copeland v. Emory L. Palmer (David Copeland v. Emory L. Palmer) 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

David Copeland v. Emory L. Palmer, (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 26, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A1313. DAVID COPELAND v. EMORY L. PALMER et al.

David Copeland, who currently is serving a prison sentence following a 2013 conviction for aggravated assault, filed this civil action seeking a writ of error quo warranto against several individual defendants under OCGA § 9-6-60 et seq. The trial court dismissed Copeland’s petition against each of the named defendants in three separate orders entered on February 10 and 27, 2018. Copeland then filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (“PLRA”), 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). A “prisoner” for purposes of the PLRA “means a person 17 years of age or older who has been convicted of a crime and is presently incarcerated or is being held in custody awaiting trial or sentencing.”1 OCGA § 42-12-3 (4). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Because Copeland was incarcerated when he filed this civil action, his failure to comply with the discretionary review procedure deprives us of

1 The record contains no indication that Copeland is under the age of 17. jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Jones, 267 Ga. at 490-491.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/26/2019 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 26, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A1313. DAVID COPELAND v. EMORY L. PALMER et al.

David Copeland, who currently is serving a prison sentence following a 2013 conviction for aggravated assault, filed this civil action seeking a writ of error quo warranto against several individual defendants under OCGA § 9-6-60 et seq. The trial court dismissed Copeland’s petition against each of the named defendants in three separate orders entered on February 10 and 27, 2018. Copeland then filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (“PLRA”), 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). A “prisoner” for purposes of the PLRA “means a person 17 years of age or older who has been convicted of a crime and is presently incarcerated or is being held in custody awaiting trial or sentencing.”1 OCGA § 42-12-3 (4). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Because Copeland was incarcerated when he filed this civil action, his failure to comply with the discretionary review procedure deprives us of

1 The record contains no indication that Copeland is under the age of 17. jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. See Jones, 267 Ga. at 490-491.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/26/2019 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)

David Copeland v. Emory L. Palmer, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-copeland-v-emory-l-palmer-gactapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack