Baker v. State
| Decision Date | 03 January 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 32757,32757 |
| Citation | 240 Ga. 431,241 S.E.2d 187 |
| Parties | Charlie L. BAKER v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Smathers, Derrickson & Bowen, Joy E. Smathers, Atlanta, for appellant.
Hinson McAuliffe, Sol. Gen., James L. Webb, Richard E. Stark, Asst. Sols. Gen., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Charles L. Baker was tried and convicted of violating Code Ann. § 26-2610(b) (Ga.L.1968, pp. 1249, 1316; 1974, p. 470) which prohibits the use of unprovoked obscene and vulgar or profane language in the presence of a woman, or of a male under the age of fourteen. Prior to trial the defendant attacked the constitutionality of this section on the ground of gender based discrimination. The State Court of Fulton County determined it was constitutional. The defendant was sentenced on April 28, 1977, to serve six months to run concurrently with a previous sentence and he appealed to this court on constitutional grounds.
Notice of appeal was filed in the trial court on May 25, 1977. The record was docketed in this court on August 1, and the defendant's enumerations of error and brief were routinely filed on August 22, albeit after the defendant was released from confinement on August 16, 1977.
This appeal is dismissed as moot in view of the fact that the sentence has been served. Although a court may exercise its discretion to decide a criminal case even after the sentence has been served (St. Pierre v. United States, 319 U.S. 41, 63 S.Ct. 910, 87 L.Ed. 1199 (1943); Chaplin v. State, 141 Ga.App. 788, 234 S.E.2d 330 (1977)), it is not bound to do so. Jacobs v. New York, 388 U.S. 431, 87 S.Ct. 2098, 18 L.Ed.2d 1294 (1967); Tannenbaum v. New York, 388 U.S. 439, 87 S.Ct. 2107, 18 L.Ed.2d 1300 (1967).
We decline to reach the merits of this appeal because the defendant has not demonstrated any efforts to expedite the appeal, preparation of record, etc., and has not shown, on this record, adverse collateral consequences as in Parris v. State, 232 Ga. 687, 689-690, 208 S.E.2d 493 (1974). Moreover, the question raised is not one which can never be decided because it inevitably becomes moot prior to an appeal, as in Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 110 n. 11, 95 S.Ct. 854, 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975). If defendant's sentence had not been set concurrently with another sentence, he should have been eligible for bail pending appeal of his misdemeanor conviction, Code § 27-901, and his appeal would not have become moot.
Appeal dismissed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sentinel Offender Svcs., LLC v. Glover, s. S14A1033
...once a sentence has expired, a claim for prospective relief regarding the legality of the sentence is moot. See Baker v. State, 240 Ga. 431, 432, 241 S.E.2d 187 (1978). See also Miller v. State, 288 Ga. 153, 154, 702 S.E.2d 137 (2010) (holding that Miller's appeal challenging his partial se......
-
Davis v. Thomas
...the appeal, preparation of the record, etc., and has not shown, on this record, adverse collateral consequences. See Baker v. State, 240 Ga. 431, 241 S.E.2d 187 (1978). Aside from the fact that the majority's opinion is expressly limited to the peculiar facts raised here, there is no reason......
-
In re IS
...232 Ga. 687, 689, 208 S.E.2d 493 (1974), appellants have not shown adverse collateral consequences on the record, Baker v. State, 240 Ga. 431, 241 S.E.2d 187 (1978); Ritchie v. State, 257 Ga.App. 149, 570 S.E.2d 435 (2002), and we decline to presume them under these circumstances. See Spenc......
-
Kappers v. DeKalb County Bd. of Health
...relief would be of no practical benefit to defendant such that the issues raised in this appeal are rendered moot. See Baker v. State, 240 Ga. 431, 241 S.E.2d 187. See also Cagle v. PMC Dev. Co. of Ga., 233 Ga. 583, 212 S.E.2d 765. Contrary to defendant's arguments, "we find this action doe......