Branner v. Pate

• Decision Date: 08 November 2021
• Docket Number: A22A0408
• Parties: CHARLIE BRANNER v. CLAY PATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

CHARLIE BRANNER v. CLAY PATE.

No. A22A0408

Court of Appeals of Georgia

November 8, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

In November 2018, Charlie Branner entered a negotiated plea under North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162) (1970) to three counts of child molestation.^[1] On September 21, 2021, Branner filed the instant pro se mandamus petition seeking to compel the trial court to provide documentation regarding the impaneling of juries during the court's September 2017 term and a transcript of the hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The mandamus petition was assigned a new civil case number. The trial court provided Branner with some information about the juries impaneled and denied the petition as moot, and Branner filed a pro se notice of appeal.

Although judgments and orders granting or refusing to grant mandamus are generally directly appealable under OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (7), under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, any appeal in a civil case that was initiated by a prisoner must come by discretionary application. See OCGA § 42-12-8; Jones v. Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 490 (480 S.E.2d 24) (1997). Because Branner is incarcerated, he was required to file an application for discretionary appeal in order to appeal the civil mandamus ruling. See Brock v. Hardman, 303 Ga. 729, 731 (2) (814 S.E.2d 736) (2018). For this reason, we lack jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. ---------

Notes:

^[1] This is not Branner's first appearance in this Court. Branner filed a pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea while represented by counsel, and the trial court denied his motion, and he appealed to this Court. In Branner v. State, 355 Ga.App. 137 (843 S.E.2d 26) (2020), we vacated the trial court's order denying his motion and remanded the case with direction that the trial court dismiss Branner's pro se motion. Since that time, Branner filed a direct appeal from the trial court's denial of his motion for an out-of-time appeal, which this Court dismissed. See Case No. A21A0619 (May 26, 2021).

---------