Dedrick Renard Murray v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 17, 2024
DocketA24A1139
StatusPublished

This text of Dedrick Renard Murray v. State (Dedrick Renard Murray 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
Dedrick Renard Murray v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ April 17, 2024

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A1139. DEDRICK RENARD MURRAY v. THE STATE.

On March 5, 2024, prisoner Dedrick Murray filed a pro se notice of appeal from a trial court order entered on January 10, 2024. We, however, lack jurisdiction. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry of the order on appeal. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. Perlman v. Perlman, 318 Ga. App. 731, 739 (4) (734 SE2d 560) (2012). Murray urges us to apply the “mailbox rule,” but that rule applies only to habeas petitions and does not exempt a pro se prisoner from the requirement to file a timely notice of appeal in a non-habeas criminal case. See McCroskey v. State, 291 Ga. App. 15, 16 (2) (660 SE2d 735) (2008). Here, because Murray’s notice of appeal was filed 55 days after entry of the order on appeal, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED.1 Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 04/17/2024 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.

1 Given our ruling, we express no opinion on whether Murray’s pro se filing here is otherwise ineffective in light of the trial court’s ruling that he is not entitled to self representation or hybrid representation in this case. See Johnson v. State, 315 Ga. 876, 890-891 (4) (885 SE2d 725) (2023).

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

Related

McCroskey v. State
660 S.E.2d 735 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)
Perlman v. Perlman
734 S.E.2d 560 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dedrick Renard Murray v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dedrick-renard-murray-v-state-gactapp-2024.