Dudley Roberts Scott v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: February 5, 2015
• Docket: A15A0422
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ January 16, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0422. DUDLEY ROBERTS SCOTT v. THE STATE.

Dudley Scott appeals from an order denying his motion to strike certain

information from the trial court’s sentencing order pertaining to credit for time

served. This is Scott’s fourth appearance in this Court in which he has challenged his

sentence on the ground that he was not properly given credit for time served. In his

most recent appeal, Scott challenged the denial of his motion to withdraw his plea,

raising this argument. We affirmed the trial court’s denial of his motion to withdraw

his plea and, as a part thereof, ruled that Scott was not entitled to the credit sought.

See Scott v. State, 315 Ga. App. 786, 787 (2) (727 SE2d 518) (2012).

“It is axiomatic that the same issue cannot be relitigated ad infinitum. The

same is true of appeals of the same issue on the same grounds.” Echols v. State, 243

Ga. App. 775, 776 (534 SE2d 464) (2000); see also Jordan v. State, 253 Ga. App.

510, 511 (2) (559 SE2d 528) (2002). This Court’s affirmance on this issue is res

judicata. See Daniels v. State, 244 Ga. App. 522, 523, n. 6 (536 SE2d 206) (2000);

Stirling v. State, 199 Ga. App. 877 (406 SE2d 282) (1991). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.1

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 01/16/2015 Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 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 As we instructed in Scott, further challenge to the calculation of the amount of credit for time served, if any, should be asserted in a mandamus or injunction action against the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections or in a petition for habeas corpus. See Scott, supra at 787, n. 1.