Sharon Bush Ellison v. State ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • Court of Appeals
    of the State of Georgia
    ATLANTA,____________________
    June 07, 2018
    The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
    A18D0462. SHARON BUSH ELLISON v. THE STATE.
    In the trial court, Sharon Bush Ellison filed a motion to stay proceedings based
    on her claim that the case should be removed to federal court. The trial court denied
    the motion and also declined to issue a certificate of immediate review. Ellison has
    filed an application for discretionary review in this Court,1 seeking to appeal the
    denial of her motion to stay. We, however, lack jurisdiction.
    The order that Ellison seeks to appeal is a non-final order, leaving the case
    pending before the trial court. See Grange Mut. Cas. Co. v. Riverdale Apartments,
    L.P., 
    218 Ga. App. 685
    , 686-687 (463 SE2d 46) (1995) (trial court’s order denying
    a motion to stay was interlocutory, as the action remained pending before the trial
    court). Consequently, Ellison was required to use the interlocutory appeal procedures
    to obtain appellate review. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Boyd v. State, 
    191 Ga. App. 435
    ,
    435 (383 SE2d 906) (1989). Ellison’s failure to do so deprives us of jurisdiction over
    this application. See Bailey v. Bailey, 
    266 Ga. 832
    , 832-833 (471 SE2d 213) (1996).
    Additionally, Ellison failed to include a stamped “filed” copy of the trial
    court’s order as required by Court of Appeals Rule 31 (c). Without such a copy of
    the order, we cannot ascertain if the application was filed within 30 days of the day
    it was entered by the trial court clerk, which is a jurisdictional prerequisite. See
    OCGA § 5-6-35 (d); Boyle v. State, 
    190 Ga. App. 734
     (380 SE2d 57) (1989).
    1
    Ellison, pro se, titled her application as one for interlocutory review. We
    construed her application as an application for discretionary review because she failed
    to include a certificate of immediate review with her application.
    Finally, to the extent Ellison’s application should be construed as an
    application for interlocutory review, Ellison’s failure to obtain a certificate of
    immediate review from the trial court deprives us of jurisdiction over this application.
    See Bailey, 
    266 Ga. at 832-833
    . Thus, absent a timely certificate of immediate
    review, we lack jurisdiction over this application, which is hereby DISMISSED. See
    Bailey, 
    266 Ga. at 833
    ; Boyd, 191 Ga. App. at 435.
    Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
    Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
    06/07/2018
    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: A18D0462

Filed Date: 6/26/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/26/2018