Engel Aristor v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 9, 2022
DocketA22A0410
StatusPublished

This text of Engel Aristor v. State (Engel Aristor 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
Engel Aristor v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ March 09, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A0410. ENGEL ARISTOR v. THE STATE.

In 2014, Engel Aristor pleaded guilty to three counts of armed robbery and related offenses and was sentenced to a total sentence of 40 years, with the first 15 years to be served in confinement and the remainder on probation. In 2020, he filed a pro se motion for leave to file an out-of-time appeal from his convictions. The trial court entered an order on December 30, 2020, denying the motion. On March 22, 2021, Aristor filed a notice of appeal. We lack jurisdiction. To be timely, 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. Davis v. State, 330 Ga. App. 711, 711 (769 SE2d 133) (2015). Here, Aristor’s notice of appeal was filed 82 days after entry of the trial court’s order. Aristor contends, in his notice of appeal, that he was not notified of the trial court’s decision until February 26, 2021. Nonetheless, his filing did not get to the superior court in time, so we have no jurisdiction over his appeal. See Ebeling v. State, 355 Ga. App. 469, 470 (844 SE2d 518) (2020) (dismissing untimely appeal despite appellant acting promptly to file his notice of appeal after receiving the trial court’s order). Thus, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. If, as Aristor appears to suggest, his right to timely seek appellate review was frustrated due to a trial court error, his remedy is to petition the trial court to vacate and re-enter the order at issue in the manner described in Cambron v. Canal Ins. Co., 246 Ga. 147, 148-149 (1) (269 SE2d 426) (1980), disapproved in part by Wright v. Young, 297 Ga. 683, 684, n. 3 (777 SE2d 475) (2015). Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 03/09/2022 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

Cambron v. Canal Insurance
269 S.E.2d 426 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1980)
Davis v. the State
769 S.E.2d 133 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2015)
Wright v. Young
777 S.E.2d 475 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Engel Aristor v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/engel-aristor-v-state-gactapp-2022.