In the Interest Of: W.L., a Child ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                   FOURTH DIVISION
    BARNES, P. J.,
    RAY and MCMILLIAN, JJ.
    NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be
    physically received in our clerk’s office within ten
    days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.
    http://www.gaappeals.us/rules
    February 2, 2016
    In the Court of Appeals of Georgia
    A15A2247. IN THE INTEREST OF W. L., a child.
    RAY, Judge.
    On March 25, 2015, the Juvenile Court of Monroe County entered orders
    adjudicating W. L., a minor, delinquent of various offenses, ordering him to pay
    restitution, and transferring the case to the Juvenile Court of Peach County for final
    disposition. W. L. filed a direct appeal from the restitution order. Because we find
    that the order appealed was interlocutory, it is not appealable without compliance
    with the interlocutory appeal procedure of OCGA § 5-6-34 (b). Accordingly, we
    dismiss this appeal as premature because the case remains pending in the juvenile
    court.
    On March 25, 2015, W. L. rendered an admission in open court and was
    adjudicated delinquent by the Juvenile Court of Monroe County for the offenses of
    theft by receiving stolen property, fleeing and attempting to elude officers, and
    reckless driving after he took a bus from a church and damaged it while attempting
    to run away from his assigned group home. In its order, the Juvenile Court of Monroe
    County acknowledged that W. L. was a resident of Peach County and transferred the
    case to the Juvenile Court of Peach County for a final adjudication. On the same day,
    the Juvenile Court of Monroe County entered an order finding that W. L. had caused
    property damage and ordered that he pay $5,508.38 in restitution. W. L. argues on
    appeal that the juvenile court erred in awarding restitution without first considering
    evidence that he had no financial ability to pay the amount of restitution and no
    prospect of being able to pay in the foreseeable future.
    The State contends that this Court is without jurisdiction to consider W. L.’s
    direct appeal because it arises, in part, from an order transferring the case to the
    Juvenile Court of Peach County and, therefore, was not a final order. We agree.
    Under Georgia law, an interlocutory transfer order may be converted into a
    final appealable order only is if it falls under OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1), which provides
    that
    2
    [a]ppeals may be taken to the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals
    from the following judgments and rulings. . . : All final judgments, that
    is to say, where the case is no longer pending in the court below, except
    as provided in Code Section 5-6-35[.]1
    (Emphasis supplied.) “The ‘in the court below’ language in OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (1)
    is generally used to refer to a trial court as distinguished from an appellate court.”
    Lops v. Lops, 
    140 F.3d 927
    , 939 (V) (C) (11th Cir., 1998). Further, Georgia courts
    have repeatedly held that transfer orders are not appealable orders under OCGA § 5-
    6-34 (a) (1) because a case transferred from one trial court to another trial court is still
    “pending in the court below.” See, e. g., Wright v. Millines, 
    212 Ga. App. 453
    , 453
    (442 SE2d 304) (1994) (dismissing a direct appeal from the superior court’s order
    transferring the case to the superior court of a different county, concluding that the
    appeals were “premature as there is no final judgment and the case remains pending
    in the trial court”); Griffith v. Ga. Bd. of Dentistry, 
    175 Ga. App. 533
    , 533 (333 SE2d
    647) (1985) (dismissing a direct appeal from an order transferring the case from one
    jurisdiction to another, concluding that “[t]he subject transfer order is not a final
    1
    OCGA § 5-6-35 is not applicable in the present case.
    3
    judgment as the case is still pending in the court below, albeit a different court from
    the one ordering the transfer”).
    This general rule that transfer orders are not “final appealable orders” may also
    adhere when an order transfers a case to a different type of trial court below. In Fulton
    County Dept. of Family & Children Svcs. v. Perkins, 
    244 Ga. 237
    , 237-238 (259 SE2d
    427) (1978), a child’s former foster parents filed a complaint in the superior court
    seeking to adopt the child and seeking a writ of habeas corpus returning the child to
    their custody. The superior court dismissed all claims except the habeas petition and
    transferred the case to the juvenile court, which had earlier dealt with matters relating
    to custody of the child. The juvenile court then transferred the case back to the
    superior court. DFACS appealed, contending that both transfer orders were final. Id.
    at 238. Our Supreme Court disagreed and dismissed the appeal, finding that neither
    order was final because despite the transfer of forum, “[a] transfer of a child custody
    case is a continuation of that proceeding” and does not change the nature of the
    proceeding. Id. at 239. Our Supreme Court distinguished the facts of Perkins from a
    case wherein a criminal case is transferred from a juvenile court to a superior court
    because “a transfer of a juvenile [to a superior court] for trial of a crime as an adult
    is not a continuation of the same proceeding.” Id. See e. g., J. T. M. v. State, 
    142 Ga.
         4
    App. 635, 635-636 (1) (236 SE2d 764) (1977) (order transferring juvenile criminal
    proceeding to superior court is final for purposes of filing a direct appeal).
    In the present case, W. L. filed a direct appeal from an order transferring the
    case from the Juvenile Court of Monroe County to the Juvenile Court of Peach
    County. This transfer order is not final because it is the continuation of the same
    proceeding against W. L. Accordingly, we find that W. L.’s direct appeal is premature
    as there is no final judgment and the case remains pending in the juvenile court
    below. Therefore, the order from which W. L. seeks to appeal is interlocutory and not
    appealable without compliance with the interlocutory appeal procedure of OCGA §
    5-6-34 (b). Wright, supra.
    Appeal dismissed. Barnes, P. J., and McMillian, J., concur.
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A15A2247

Judges: Ray, Barnes, McMillian

Filed Date: 2/18/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/8/2024