Jessy L. Blake v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 11, 2025
DocketA25D0417
StatusPublished

This text of Jessy L. Blake v. State (Jessy L. Blake 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
Jessy L. Blake v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 11, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25D0417. JESSY L. BLAKE v. THE STATE.

In 2021, Jessy L. Blake pleaded guilty to rape. Blake filed a pro se “Motion for Void Sentence/Involuntary Plea/Failure to Arraign.”1 The trial court denied the motion on April 16, 2025, and Blake filed this discretionary application on May 19, 2025. In his application, he contends that the court never arraigned him and thus his conviction should be vacated. We lack jurisdiction. As an initial matter, the application is untimely. An application for discretionary appeal must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d). The requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an application for appeal not made in compliance therewith. Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Blake filed this application 33 days after entry of the trial court’s order. And even if the application had been timely filed, regardless of nomenclature, Blake’s underlying motion seeks to vacate or challenge the validity of his conviction. See State v. Bell, 274 Ga. 719, 719 (1) (559 SE2d 477) (2002) (when a court considers pleadings, substance controls over nomenclature). A motion seeking to challenge an allegedly invalid or void judgment of conviction “is not one of the established procedures for challenging the validity of a judgment in a criminal case,” and an appeal from the denial of such a motion is subject to dismissal. Roberts v. State, 286

1 The motion was not included in the application materials, in violation of Court of Appeals Rule 31 (e). Ga. 532, 532 (690 SE2d 150) (2010). For these reasons, this application is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 06/11/2025 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

Boyle v. State of Georgia
380 S.E.2d 57 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
State v. Bell
559 S.E.2d 477 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jessy L. Blake v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jessy-l-blake-v-state-gactapp-2025.