Edward T. Ridley v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 20, 2020
DocketA20A1152
StatusPublished

This text of Edward T. Ridley v. State (Edward T. Ridley 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
Edward T. Ridley v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 20, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A20A1152. EDWARD T. RIDLEY v. THE STATE.

In 2013, Edward Ridley pled guilty to failure to register as a sex offender, and the trial court imposed a sentence that included a term of probation. In November 2019, the trial court revoked eight years of Ridley’s probation after finding that he failed to pay court-ordered monies and committed a new felony offense. Ridley then filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction. An appeal from an order revoking probation must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review. OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (5), (b); see Andrews v. State, 276 Ga. App. 428, 430-431 (1) & n. 3 (623 SE2d 247) (2005). “Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Ridley’s failure to follow the proper procedure deprives us of jurisdiction over this appeal. Although Ridley’s notice of appeal was directed to this Court and identified § 5-6-35 (a) (5) as the basis for his appeal, he filed it in the trial court (which properly construed it as a notice of appeal), rather than this Court. An application for discretionary review must be filed in the appropriate appellate court. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d); compare OCGA § 5-6-37 (a notice of appeal must be filed “with the clerk of the court wherein the case was determined”). Regardless, Ridley previously filed an application for discretionary review of the November 2019 probation revocation order, which we denied on the merits. See Ridley v. State, No. A20D0212 (Dec. 27, 2019). Because we rejected Ridley’s challenge to the trial court order sought to be appealed here in Case No. A20D0212, the current appeal also is barred by the law of the case. See Ross v. State, 310 Ga. App. 326, 327 (713 SE2d 438) (2011) (“[A]ny issue that was raised and resolved in an earlier appeal is the law of the case and is binding on this Court . . . .”) (punctuation omitted); accord Hook v. Bergen, 286 Ga. App. 258, 261 (1) (649 SE2d 313) (2007) (a ruling on an application for discretionary appeal acts as res judicata in later proceedings); see also Jackson v. State, 273 Ga. 320, 320 (540 SE2d 612) (2001) (a defendant “is not entitled to another bite at the apple by way of a second appeal”). For each of the above reasons, this direct appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/20/2020 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Wi tness 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

Andrews v. State
623 S.E.2d 247 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2005)
Jackson v. State
540 S.E.2d 612 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2001)
Ross v. State
713 S.E.2d 438 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2011)
Smoak v. Department of Human Resources
471 S.E.2d 60 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Hook v. Bergen
649 S.E.2d 313 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Edward T. Ridley v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-t-ridley-v-state-gactapp-2020.