David Nealy Jr. v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedAugust 5, 2021
DocketA22D0010
StatusPublished

This text of David Nealy Jr. v. State (David Nealy Jr. 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
David Nealy Jr. v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ August 05, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22D0010. DAVID NEALY, JR. v. THE STATE.

David Nealy, Jr., was convicted of several offenses, including aggravated child molestation and statutory rape. We affirmed his convictions in an unpublished opinion. Nealy v. State, Case No. A03A2116 (Sept. 18, 2003). Nealy later moved to vacate his convictions and sentence, arguing that the charges should have merged. The trial court denied the motion, and Nealy appealed. We dismissed the appeal because Nealy failed to raise a colorable claim that his sentence was void. Nealy v. State, Case No. A15A0497 (Dec. 8, 2014). Back in the trial court, Nealy filed another motion asserting that his indictment was fatally defective. The trial court denied that motion, and Nealy filed this application for discretionary appeal. Nealy’s challenges to the validity of the indictment are an attack upon his convictions. See Thompson v. State, 304 Ga. 146, 149 (3) (816 SE2d 646) (2018); Jones v. State, 290 Ga. App. 490, 494 (2) (659 SE2d 875) (2008). 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, __ Ga. App. __ (1) (Case No. A21A0383, decided June 15, 2021) (“a motion to vacate an allegedly void conviction is an improper mechanism in which to collaterally attack a conviction”). Because Nealy 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,____________________ 08/05/2021 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

Harper v. State
686 S.E.2d 786 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2009)
Jones v. State
659 S.E.2d 875 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)
Roberts v. State
690 S.E.2d 150 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2010)
Thompson v. State
816 S.E.2d 646 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2018)
Thompson v. State
304 Ga. 146 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
David Nealy Jr. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-nealy-jr-v-state-gactapp-2021.