Scott Michael Teague v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 21, 2014
DocketA14I0146
StatusPublished

This text of Scott Michael Teague v. State (Scott Michael Teague 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
Scott Michael Teague v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,__________________ March 21, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A14I0146. SCOTT MICHAEL TEAGUE v. THE STATE.

Judge Kenneth G. Vinson of Paulding County Superior Court, denied Scott Michael Teague’s motion to suppress. Teague then obtained a certificate of immediate review, signed by Judge Tonny S. Beavers, and filed this application for interlocutory appeal. We lack jurisdiction. Under OCGA § 5-6-34 (b), a party may apply for interlocutory appellate review “[w]here the trial judge in rendering an order, decision, or judgment not otherwise subject to direct appeal . . . certifies within ten days of entry thereof that the order, decision, or judgment is of such importance to the case that immediate review should be had . . .” (Emphasis supplied.) The plain language of the statute requires that the same judge who enters the order in question must certify it for immediate review. Mauer v. Parker Fibernet, LLC, 306 Ga. App. 160, 162 (701 SE2d 599) (2010).1 Because the certificate of immediate review submitted by Teague is invalid, it does not confer jurisdiction upon this Court to consider this application for interlocutory appeal. The application is therefore DISMISSED.

1 This court has recognized a limited exception to this rule where evidence shows that the trial judge was unavailable to execute the certificate. See Freemon v. Dubroca, 177 Ga. App. 745 (1) (341 SE2d 276) (1986); Tingle v. Harvill, 125 Ga. App. 312, 317-318 (2) (187 SE2d 536) (1972); see also Thorpe v. Russell, 274 Ga. 781, 781-782 (559 SE2d 432) (2002). Teague, however, has made no showing that Judge Vinson was unavailable. Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 03/21/2014 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

Freemon v. Dubroca
341 S.E.2d 276 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1986)
Tingle v. Harvill
187 S.E.2d 536 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1972)
Mauer v. Parker Fibernet, LLC
701 S.E.2d 599 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2010)
Thorpe v. Russell
559 S.E.2d 432 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Scott Michael Teague v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-michael-teague-v-state-gactapp-2014.