Paul Brent Howell v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Paul Brent Howell v. State

DecidedJuly 18, 2016

DocketA16D0425

StatusPublished

This text of Paul Brent Howell v. State (Paul Brent Howell 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

Paul Brent Howell v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 29, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0425. PAUL BRENT HOWELL v. THE STATE.

Paul Brent Howell seeks discretionary review of the trial court’s order denying his motion for sentence modification. A sentencing court may modify a sentence within one year of its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal, whichever is later. See OCGA § 17-10-1 (f); Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 347-348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010). The denial of a timely motion to modify under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f) is subject to direct appeal. See, e. g., Anderson v. State, 290 Ga. App. 890 (660 SE2d 876) (2008); Maldonado v. State, 260 Ga. App. 580 (580 SE2d 330) (2003). This Court will grant a timely discretionary application if the lower court’s order is subject to direct appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). From the limited application material submitted, it appears the order at issue is subject to direct appeal.1 Accordingly, this application is hereby GRANTED. Howell shall have ten days from the date of this order to file a notice of appeal with the trial court if he has not already done so. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (g). The clerk of the superior court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

1 Howell has not included either his sentencing sheet or his motion for sentence modification with his application material. But it appears from the few documents submitted that the case remained pending in August 2015, in which case both his sentence and motion for modification were necessarily filed within the past year. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 06/29/2016 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ June 29, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16D0425. PAUL BRENT HOWELL v. THE STATE.

Paul Brent Howell seeks discretionary review of the trial court’s order denying his motion for sentence modification. A sentencing court may modify a sentence within one year of its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal, whichever is later. See OCGA § 17-10-1 (f); Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 347-348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010). The denial of a timely motion to modify under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f) is subject to direct appeal. See, e. g., Anderson v. State, 290 Ga. App. 890 (660 SE2d 876) (2008); Maldonado v. State, 260 Ga. App. 580 (580 SE2d 330) (2003). This Court will grant a timely discretionary application if the lower court’s order is subject to direct appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). From the limited application material submitted, it appears the order at issue is subject to direct appeal.1 Accordingly, this application is hereby GRANTED. Howell shall have ten days from the date of this order to file a notice of appeal with the trial court if he has not already done so. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (g). The clerk of the superior court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

1 Howell has not included either his sentencing sheet or his motion for sentence modification with his application material. But it appears from the few documents submitted that the case remained pending in August 2015, in which case both his sentence and motion for modification were necessarily filed within the past year. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 06/29/2016 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Paul Brent Howell v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-brent-howell-v-state-gactapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack