Maurice Imes v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
• Decided: July 11, 2025
• Docket: A25D0457
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ July 11, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25D0457. MAURICE IMES v. THE STATE.

After being charged with aggravated assault and other crimes, Maurice Imes, who was represented by an attorney, filed a pro se “Motion to Dismiss Speedy Trial Violation.” The trial court dismissed the motion on June 3, 2025, finding that Imes did not have the right to both represent himself and be represented by an attorney. On June 17, 2025, Imes filed this pro se discretionary application and the State then filed a motion to dismiss. For the following reasons, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction. Pretermitting the issues involving Imes’s pro se status here,1 the trial court’s June 3 order was not a final judgment that disposed of all issues in this case. Thus, Imes was required to use the interlocutory appeal procedures — including obtaining a certificate of immediate review from the trial court — to appeal the June 3 order. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Boyd v. State, 191 Ga. App. 435, 435 (383 SE2d 906) (1989). Imes’s failure to comply with the interlocutory appeal requirements deprives us of jurisdiction over this application. See Bailey v. Bailey, 266 Ga. 832, 833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996).

1 Though the application materials contain a May 23, 2025 letter from Imes’s attorney requesting withdrawal from representation in the case, the status of that request is unclear. For these reasons, we hereby GRANT the State’s motion to dismiss and DISMISS this application for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 07/11/2025 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.