Stevie Eusery v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Stevie Eusery v. State

DecidedDecember 25, 2014

DocketA15A0426

StatusPublished

This text of Stevie Eusery v. State (Stevie Eusery 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

Stevie Eusery v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 22, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0426. STEVIE EUSERY v. THE STATE.

In 2001, Stevie Eursery pled guilty to two counts of armed robbery, and the trial court sentenced him to 15 years on each count, to run consecutively. Eusery filed a “Motion to Correct a Void Judgment,” arguing that the combined 30 year sentence exceeded that permitted by law. According to Eusery, the sentences should run concurrently. The trial court found that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on the motion, and Eursery filed this direct appeal. A direct appeal may lie from an order denying a motion to vacate or correct a void sentence, but only if the defendant raises a colorable claim that the sentence is, in fact, void. See Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 217 n.1 (686 SE2d 786) (2009); Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 119 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). A sentence is void only if it imposes punishment that the law does not allow. See Crumbley v. State, 261 Ga. 610, 611 (a) (409 SE2d 517) (1991). “Motions to vacate a void sentence generally are limited to claims that – even assuming the existence and validity of the conviction for which the sentence was imposed – the law does not authorize that sentence, most typically because it exceeds the most severe punishment for which the applicable penal statute provides.” Von Thomas v. State, 293 Ga. 569, 572 (2) (748 SE2d 446) (2013). Eusery’s sentences fall within the permissible range for armed robbery. See OCGA § 16-8-41 (b) (“[a] person convicted of the offense of armed robbery shall be punished by death or imprisonment for life or by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years.”). Furthermore, the trial court was authorized to impose consecutive sentences based upon the two separate charges of armed robbery. See Simpson v. State, 310 Ga. App. 63, 64 (715 SE2d 675) (2011). Under these circumstances, Eusery has not raised a colorable void sentence claim, and this direct appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 12/22/2014 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

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ December 22, 2014

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0426. STEVIE EUSERY v. THE STATE.

In 2001, Stevie Eursery pled guilty to two counts of armed robbery, and the trial court sentenced him to 15 years on each count, to run consecutively. Eusery filed a “Motion to Correct a Void Judgment,” arguing that the combined 30 year sentence exceeded that permitted by law. According to Eusery, the sentences should run concurrently. The trial court found that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on the motion, and Eursery filed this direct appeal. A direct appeal may lie from an order denying a motion to vacate or correct a void sentence, but only if the defendant raises a colorable claim that the sentence is, in fact, void. See Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 217 n.1 (686 SE2d 786) (2009); Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 119 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). A sentence is void only if it imposes punishment that the law does not allow. See Crumbley v. State, 261 Ga. 610, 611 (a) (409 SE2d 517) (1991). “Motions to vacate a void sentence generally are limited to claims that – even assuming the existence and validity of the conviction for which the sentence was imposed – the law does not authorize that sentence, most typically because it exceeds the most severe punishment for which the applicable penal statute provides.” Von Thomas v. State, 293 Ga. 569, 572 (2) (748 SE2d 446) (2013). Eusery’s sentences fall within the permissible range for armed robbery. See OCGA § 16-8-41 (b) (“[a] person convicted of the offense of armed robbery shall be punished by death or imprisonment for life or by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years.”). Furthermore, the trial court was authorized to impose consecutive sentences based upon the two separate charges of armed robbery. See Simpson v. State, 310 Ga. App. 63, 64 (715 SE2d 675) (2011). Under these circumstances, Eusery has not raised a colorable void sentence claim, and this direct appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia 12/22/2014 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Stevie Eusery v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevie-eusery-v-state-gactapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack