In the Interest of L. D., a Child (Father)

Court of Appeals of Georgia

In the Interest of L. D., a Child (Father)

DecidedFebruary 26, 2019

DocketA19D0306

StatusPublished

This text of In the Interest of L. D., a Child (Father) (In the Interest of L. D., a Child (Father)) 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

In the Interest of L. D., a Child (Father), (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 13, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19D0300. IN THE INTEREST OF L. D., A CHILD (FATHER). A19D0306. IN THE INTEREST OF D. D., A CHILD (FATHER).

The juvenile court entered an order terminating the father’s parental rights to the above-referenced minor children. The father filed a motion for new trial. On December 18, 2018, the juvenile court entered an order denying that motion. At 3:12 a.m. and at 11:32 p.m. on January 18, 2019, the father electronically filed these two applications for discretionary review. We lack jurisdiction.

The Court has recently granted the mother’s applications arising from the same order, and the Court would prefer to hear both parents’ appeals on the merits. The Court’s docket indicates, however, that the father’s applications were electronically filed at 3:12 a.m. and 11:32 p.m. respectively on the 31st day after the statutory deadline. To be timely, a discretionary application must be filed within 30 days of entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d); Hill v. State, 204 Ga. App. 582 (420 SE2d 393) (1992). This statutory deadline is jurisdictional, and we cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance with OCGA § 5-6-34 (d). Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). These applications are therefore untimely, and they are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. If the father possesses evidence to the contrary, he is free to move for reconsideration of these dismissals within the time required by Court of Appeals Rule 37 (b).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/13/2019 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ February 13, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19D0300. IN THE INTEREST OF L. D., A CHILD (FATHER). A19D0306. IN THE INTEREST OF D. D., A CHILD (FATHER).

The juvenile court entered an order terminating the father’s parental rights to the above-referenced minor children. The father filed a motion for new trial. On December 18, 2018, the juvenile court entered an order denying that motion. At 3:12 a.m. and at 11:32 p.m. on January 18, 2019, the father electronically filed these two applications for discretionary review. We lack jurisdiction.

The Court has recently granted the mother’s applications arising from the same order, and the Court would prefer to hear both parents’ appeals on the merits. The Court’s docket indicates, however, that the father’s applications were electronically filed at 3:12 a.m. and 11:32 p.m. respectively on the 31st day after the statutory deadline. To be timely, a discretionary application must be filed within 30 days of entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d); Hill v. State, 204 Ga. App. 582 (420 SE2d 393) (1992). This statutory deadline is jurisdictional, and we cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance with OCGA § 5-6-34 (d). Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). These applications are therefore untimely, and they are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. If the father possesses evidence to the contrary, he is free to move for reconsideration of these dismissals within the time required by Court of Appeals Rule 37 (b).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 02/13/2019 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

In the Interest of L. D., a Child (Father), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-l-d-a-child-father-gactapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack