Donald Smith, Jr. v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided August 24, 2017·No. A18A0125·Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ August 24, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A18A0125. DONALD SMITH, JR. v. THE STATE.

In June 2014, Donald Smith, Jr., entered a negotiated guilty plea to first-degree burglary, and the trial court sentenced him as a recidivist to eight years’ imprisonment. The record contains no indication that Smith filed a direct appeal from his judgment of conviction. In May 2016, Smith filed a “Petition to Correc[t] Sentence,” in which he contended that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to sentence him as a recidivist because the State had submitted insufficient evidence of the required predicate convictions. The trial court dismissed Smith’s petition, and he filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal, whichever is later. Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010). Once this statutory period expires, a trial court may modify only a void sentence. Id. A sentence is void if the court imposes punishment that the law does not allow. Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669, 670 (604 SE2d 483) (2004). When a sentence falls within the statutory range of punishment, it is not void and is not subject to modification beyond the time provided in § 17-10-1 (f). See id. Moreover, a direct appeal does not lie from the denial of a motion to modify a sentence filed outside the statutory time period unless the motion raises a colorable claim that the sentence is, in fact, void. Frazier, 302 Ga. App. at 348. A claim that the State failed to prove the existence of a prior conviction by admissible evidence may be waived and therefore does not present a colorable claim that an ensuing enhanced sentence is void. von Thomas v. State, 293 Ga. 569, 572- 573 (2) (748 SE2d 446) (2013). Moreover, even assuming that Smith was improperly sentenced as a recidivist, a trial court may sentence a defendant to up to 20 years’ imprisonment for first-degree burglary regardless of whether the defendant is deemed a recidivist. See OCGA § 16-7-1 (b). Accordingly, Smith’s eight-year sentence is not more severe than the law allows, and it is not void. See Brown v. State, 295 Ga. App. 66, 67-68 (670 SE2d 867) (2008). Because Smith has not raised a colorable void-sentence claim, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See Frazier, 302 Ga. App. at 348-349.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 08/24/2017 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

Donald Smith, Jr. v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2017).

Donald Smith, Jr. v. State (Donald Smith, Jr. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. State
670 S.E.2d 867 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)
Jones v. State
604 S.E.2d 483 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Frazier v. State
691 S.E.2d 247 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2010)
von Thomas v. State
748 S.E.2d 446 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)