Hooks v. State
| Decision Date | 19 August 1993 |
| Docket Number | A93A1802,Nos. A93A1801,s. A93A1801 |
| Citation | 435 S.E.2d 617,210 Ga.App. 171 |
| Parties | HOOKS v. The STATE. (Two cases) |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Nelson A. Hooks, pro se.
Lewis R. Slaton, Dist. Atty., Carl P. Greenberg, Henry M. Newkirk, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.
Defendant was tried before a jury and convicted of kidnapping (Count 1), aggravated battery (Count 2), robbery (Count 3) and theft by taking (Count 4). Defendant appealed after the denial of his motion for new trial and his convictions were affirmed by this court in an unpublished opinion. See Hooks v. State, Case No. A91A1196, decided October 28, 1991. Defendant later appeared in the trial court and filed, pro se, a motion for correction of the record and an extraordinary motion for new trial, contending that the trial transcript is inaccurate; that his trial and appellate attorneys were ineffective; that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdicts; that the State's attorney improperly relied on the victim's perjured testimony and that the State's attorney made false statements to the jury, in violation of OCGA § 17-8-75. The trial court denied these motions in separate orders.
Defendant filed a direct appeal from the denial of his motion for correction of the record in Case No. A93A1801. Defendant filed a direct appeal from the denial of his extraordinary motion for new trial in Case No. A93A1802. Held:
Appeals from the denial of extraordinary motions for new trial, when separate from an original direct appeal, are subject to the discretionary appeal procedure of OCGA § 5-6-35. OCGA § 5-6-35(a)(7); Walls v. State, 204 Ga.App. 348, 419 S.E.2d 344. In the cases sub judice, defendant's post-appeal motions constitute extraordinary motions for new trial since the motions were filed more than 30 days after the entry of judgment. See OCGA §§ 5-5-40, 5-5-41; Dick v. State, 248 Ga. 898(1), 287 S.E.2d 11; Williams v. State, 254 Ga. 6, 9(2), 326 S.E.2d 444. Consequently, these direct appeals must be dismissed since they are separate from defendant's original appeal. Davis v. State, 182 Ga.App. 736, 356 S.E.2d 762. See Walls v. State, 204 Ga.App. 348, 419 S.E.2d 344, supra.
Appeals dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Balkcom v. State
...omitted.) Dick v. State, supra at 898-899(1). See Gibbs v. State, 213 Ga.App. 117, 443 S.E.2d 708 (1994); Hooks v. State, 210 Ga.App. 171, 172, 435 S.E.2d 617 (1993); King v. State, 208 Ga.App. 77, 82, 430 S.E.2d 640 (1993) (Beasley, P. J., concurring specially), overruled on other grounds,......
- Ridgeway v. Whisman, A93A0891
-
Gibbs v. State
...to proceed by application. Since a direct appeal was permitted but not properly taken, the appeal must be dismissed. Hooks v. State, 210 Ga.App. 171, 435 S.E.2d 617 (1993). In the interest of finality and to avert a claim of ineffective appellate counsel, we will consider the enumerations a......
-
Torts - Cynthia Trimboli Adams and Charles R. Adams, Iii
...214. 210 Ga. App. 169, 435 S.E.2d 624 (1993). 215. Id. at 170, 435 S.E.2d at 626 (quoting georgia torts, supra note 9, at 164). 216. 210 Ga. App. at 171, 435 S.E.2d at 627. 217. 210 Ga. App. 350, 436 S.E.2d 78 (1993). 218. Id. at 350, 436 S.E.2d at 78. While in his employer's truck, plainti......