Johnathan Christopher Mulgrave v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 11, 2019
DocketA19I0144
StatusPublished

This text of Johnathan Christopher Mulgrave v. State (Johnathan Christopher Mulgrave 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
Johnathan Christopher Mulgrave v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ January 22, 2019

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19I0144. JOHNATHAN CHRISTOPHER MULGRAVE v. THE STATE.

Johnathan Christopher Mulgrave is facing criminal prosecution for numerous charges, and he filed a motion to suppress statements made during his interrogation. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the motion. Mulgrave sought a certificate of immediate review, which the trial court declined to issue. Mulgrave nonetheless filed this application for interlocutory appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction. Because the action remains pending below, Mulgrave was required to comply with the interlocutory-appeal procedure, including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). This Court will “not review the unfettered discretion vested in the trial court in granting or refusing a certificate for immediate review of interlocutory rulings.” B & D Fabricators v. D.H. Blair Inv. Banking Corp., 220 Ga. App. 373, 376 (3) (469 SE2d 683) (1996). Mulgrave argues that we should consider this application pursuant to Waldrip v. Head, 272 Ga. 572 (532 SE2d 380) (2000). In Waldrip, the Supreme Court held that an appellate court may exercise its discretion to review an interlocutory order without a certificate of immediate review in “exceptional cases that involve an issue of great concern, gravity, and importance to the public and no timely opportunity for appellate review.” Waldrip, 272 Ga. at 575 (1). This is not one of the rare cases in which ignoring the certificate requirement is warranted. Because Mulgrave did not obtain a certificate of immediate review, we lack jurisdiction to consider this application, which is hereby DISMISSED

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 01/22/2019 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

Related

Waldrip v. Head
532 S.E.2d 380 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2000)
B & D Fabricators v. D. H. Blair Investment Banking Corp.
469 S.E.2d 683 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Johnathan Christopher Mulgrave v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnathan-christopher-mulgrave-v-state-gactapp-2019.