Robert C. Beasley v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 12, 2015
DocketA15I0090
StatusPublished

This text of Robert C. Beasley v. State (Robert C. Beasley 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
Robert C. Beasley v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ January 05, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15I0090. ROBERT C. BEASLEY v. THE STATE.

Robert C. Beasley was convicted of trafficking cocaine. He appealed, arguing among other things that the trial judge’s failure to disclose a conflict of interest had violated his due process rights. We vacated the conviction and remanded for a factual determination of when Beasley and his counsel had first learned of the grounds for disqualifying the trial judge. Beasley v. State, 328 Ga. App. 96 (761 SE2d 509) (2014). On remand, the State proposed that Beasley be granted a new trial, but Beasley opposed that offer and filed a “Brief of Legal Issues” arguing that a new trial would place him in double jeopardy. Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order granting Beasley a new trial. The court later certified its order for immediate review, and Beasley filed this timely application for interlocutory appeal. Beasley’s “Brief of Legal Issues” was, in substance, a plea in bar on grounds of double jeopardy. See Giles v. State, 257 Ga. App. 65, 69 (2) (570 SE2d 375) (2002) (“[I]t is well established that there is no magic in nomenclature. A document is to be construed by its substance or function, rather than by its name.”) (citation and punctuation omitted). The trial court’s order granting a new trial was, in substance, a denial of that plea in bar and therefore was directly appealable. See Malloy v. State, 293 Ga. 350, 352 (1) (744 SE2d 778) (2013); Patterson v. State, 248 Ga. 875 (287 SE2d 7) (1982). This Court will grant a timely application for interlocutory appeal if the order is subject to direct appeal and the applicant has not otherwise filed a timely notice of appeal. See Spivey v. Hembree, 268 Ga. App. 485, 486 n. 1 (602 SE2d 246) (2004). It appears that Beasley has not filed a notice of appeal; therefore, the application is hereby GRANTED. Beasley shall have ten days from the date of this order to file a notice of appeal in the trial court. The clerk of the trial court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to this Court.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 01/05/2015 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

Related

Giles v. State
570 S.E.2d 375 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2002)
Patterson v. State
287 S.E.2d 7 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1982)
Spivey v. Hembree
602 S.E.2d 246 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2004)
Malloy v. State
744 S.E.2d 778 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
Beasley v. State
761 S.E.2d 509 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Robert C. Beasley v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-c-beasley-v-state-gactapp-2015.