Derek Klingensmith v. State
This text of Derek Klingensmith v. State (Derek Klingensmith 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.
Opinion
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA,____________________ January 16, 2024
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
A24A0569. DEREK KLINGENSMITH v. THE STATE. A24A0570. DEREK KLINGENSMITH v. THE STATE.
In two separate cases, Derek Klingensmith pleaded guilty to forgery in the first degree and possession of a controlled substance. The trial court imposed a sentence of five years for forgery, which Klingensmith was permitted to serve on probation as a first offender under OCGA § 42-8-60, and three years for possession of a controlled substance, which he was permitted to serve on probation with an adjudication of guilt deferred under the conditional discharge statute, OCGA § 16-13-2. These sentences were to be served concurrently. On November 3, 2023, the trial court entered orders adjudicating Klingensmith guilty, revoking his first offender status and conditional discharge, and revoking his probation. Klingensmith has appealed directly to this Court. We lack jurisdiction. Because the underlying subject matter of Klingensmith’s appeals is the revocation of his probation, he was required to file applications for discretionary appeal to obtain review in this Court. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (5); Andrews v. State, 276 Ga. App. 428, 430-431 (1) (623 SE2d 247) (2005) (an appeal from the revocation of conditional-discharge probation and adjudication of guilt under OCGA § 16-13-2 must be initiated by an application for discretionary review); Jones v. State, 322 Ga. App. 269, 269 n.2 (745 SE2d 1) (2013) (an appeal from the revocation of first offender probation under OCGA § 42-8-60 must be initiated by an application for discretionary review). Klingensmith’s failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over these direct appeals. See White v. State, 233 Ga. App. 873, 874 (505 SE2d 228) (1998). Accordingly, these appeals are hereby DISMISSED
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia C l e r k ’ s O f f i c e , Atlanta,____________________ 01/16/2024 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Derek Klingensmith v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/derek-klingensmith-v-state-gactapp-2024.