Adrian Bernard Payton v. State ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • Court of Appeals
    of the State of Georgia
    ATLANTA,____________________
    November 20, 2019
    The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
    A20D0146. ADRIAN BERNARD PAYTON v. THE STATE.
    It appears that in 2013, Adrian Bernard Payton pled guilty to armed robbery
    and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. It also appears that in
    February 2019, Payton filed a “motion to correct void and illegal sentence,” alleging
    that his arrest warrant affidavit was deficient. The trial court denied the motion on
    August 27, 2019. On October 25, 2019, Payton filed this application for discretionary
    review of the trial court’s order. We lack jurisdiction for two reasons.
    First, Payton’s application is untimely. To be timely, a discretionary application
    must be filed within 30 days of entry of the order to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-35 (d);
    Hill v. State, 
    204 Ga. App. 582
    , 583 (420 SE2d 393) (1992). This statutory deadline
    is jurisdictional, and we cannot accept an application for appeal not made in
    compliance therewith. Boyle v. State, 
    190 Ga. App. 734
    , 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989).
    Payton filed this application 59 days after entry of the order he seeks to appeal. The
    application is therefore untimely.
    Second, an appeal may lie from an order denying or dismissing a motion to
    correct a void sentence if the defendant raises a colorable claim that the sentence is,
    in fact, void, but Payton has not raised such a claim. See Harper v. State, 
    286 Ga. 216
    , 217 n. 1 (1) (686 SE2d 786) (2009); 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). Payton
    does not contend that his sentence exceeded the statutory range of punishment;
    instead, his challenge to his arrest warrant constitutes a challenge to the validity of
    his conviction. A motion to vacate a judgment of conviction – which, in substance,
    is what Payton filed here – “is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case,” and any
    appeal from an order denying or dismissing such a motion must be dismissed. See
    Harper, 286 Ga. at 218 (1); see also Roberts v. State, 
    286 Ga. 532
    , 532 (690 SE2d
    150) (2010). A challenge to a criminal conviction “may be considered only in a
    traditionally recognized proceeding to challenge a criminal conviction,” including a
    petition for habeas corpus. See Nazario v. State, 
    293 Ga. 480
    , 488 (2) (d) (746 SE2d
    109) (2013); see also OCGA § 9-14-40 et seq.
    Accordingly, this application is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
    Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
    Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
    11/20/2019
    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: A20D0146

Filed Date: 12/4/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/4/2019