Gary Ford v. State ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • Court of Appeals
    of the State of Georgia
    ATLANTA,____________________
    May 25, 2016
    The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
    A16D0365. GARY FORD v. THE STATE.
    On August 25, 2009, Gary Ford pled guilty to aggravated battery, robbery by
    force, and battery. Ford subsequently filed a number of motions to vacate, which the
    trial court denied. Most recently, Ford filed a “Petition for Equitable Relief from
    Judgment Due to Fraud,” which the trial court construed as a motion to vacate. The
    trial court denied the motion on April 5, 2016, and Ford filed this direct appeal. We
    lack jurisdiction.
    “[A] petition to vacate or modify a judgment of conviction is not an appropriate
    remedy in a criminal case.” Harper v. State, 
    286 Ga. 216
    , 218 (1) (686 SE2d 786)
    (2009). Any appeal from an order denying or dismissing such a motion must be
    dismissed. See 
    id. at 218
    (2); Roberts v. State, 
    286 Ga. 532
    , 532 (690 SE2d 150)
    (2010). 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, supra at 217 n.1; Burg v. State, 
    297 Ga. App. 118
    , 119
    (676 SE2d 465) (2009). “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).
    Accordingly, when a sentence is within the statutory range of punishment, it is not
    void. Jones v. State, 
    278 Ga. 669
    , 670 (604 SE2d 483) (2004).
    Here, Ford does not argue that his sentence exceeded legal limits; rather, he
    claims, among other arguments, that he was fraudulently indicted and received
    ineffective assistance of counsel. These are challenges to the validity of his
    convictions, not his sentence. See Brown v. State, 
    297 Ga. App. 738
    (678 SE2d 172)
    (2009) (challenge alleging ineffective assistance of counsel does not assert a ground
    upon which a conviction can be declared void); Jones v. State, 
    290 Ga. App. 490
    , 493
    (1) (659 SE2d 875) (2008) (challenge regarding indictment does not raise a valid void
    sentence claim). Because Taylor has not raised a colorable void-sentence claim, this
    appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See 
    Roberts, supra
    . Because
    Ford has not raised a colorable argument that his sentence is void, this appeal is
    DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
    Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
    05/25/2016
    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.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A16D0365

Filed Date: 6/10/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/10/2016