Guy Lawson Philmore v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedAugust 25, 2016
DocketA16A2122
StatusPublished

This text of Guy Lawson Philmore v. State (Guy Lawson Philmore 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
Guy Lawson Philmore v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ August 10, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A2122. GUY LAWSON PHILMORE v. THE STATE.

Guy Lawson Philmore was found guilty of felony murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Subsequently, Philmore filed a motion to modify his sentence, contending that the Board of Pardons and Paroles had improperly changed his sentence from life with parole to life without parole, and a motion for the appointment of counsel. The trial court denied Philmore’s motion to modify, which it construed as a petition for mandamus, and he appeals the denial. We lack jurisdiction. In State v. Murray, 286 Ga. 258 (687 SE2d 790) (2009), the Supreme Court held that “[i]f the underlying action is a murder case, [the Supreme] Court has jurisdiction of the appeal, regardless of whether the order being appealed is based on facts having some bearing on the underlying criminal trial.” Id. at 259 (1). See also Neal v. State, 290 Ga. 563, 572 (722 SE2d 765) (2012) (Hunstein, J., concurring); State v. Thornton, 253 Ga. 524, 524 (1) (322 SE2d 711) (1984) (directing this Court to transfer “all cases in which either a sentence of death or of life imprisonment has been imposed upon conviction of murder”). Further, to the extent Philmore’s motion was properly construed as a petition for mandamus, the Supreme Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases involving extraordinary remedies, including mandamus. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (5); Ladzinske v. Allen, 280 Ga. 264, 264 (626 SE2d 83) (2006) (“[C]ases involving the grant or denial of mandamus are within the exclusive jurisdiction of [the Supreme] Court without regard to the underlying subject matter or the legal issues raised.”). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court for disposition. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 08/10/2016 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ladzinske v. Allen
626 S.E.2d 83 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2006)
State v. Murray
687 S.E.2d 790 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2009)
State v. Thornton
322 S.E.2d 711 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1984)
Neal v. State
722 S.E.2d 765 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Guy Lawson Philmore v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guy-lawson-philmore-v-state-gactapp-2016.