State v. Mohamed
| Decision Date | 20 February 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. A91A1917,A91A1917 |
| Citation | 416 S.E.2d 358,203 Ga.App. 21 |
| Parties | The STATE v. MOHAMED. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Ralph T. Bowden, Jr., Sol., Andrew T. Rogers, W. Cliff Howard, Asst. Sols., for appellant.
Christopher G. Knighton, Atlanta, for appellee.
The State appeals the 1991 modification of defendant's misdemeanor sentence by the court after its entry in 1985, contending that it was an illegal modification.
1. First considering defendant's motion to dismiss the State's direct appeal as violative of OCGA § 5-7-1, it is denied. " State v. Smith, 193 Ga.App. 831(1), 389 S.E.2d 547 (1989).
2. On October 7, 1985, defendant was sentenced on a guilty plea to 12 months probation for misdemeanor theft by taking. The 1991 Extraordinary Motion for Modification sought nunc pro tunc entry instead of first offender treatment pursuant to OCGA § 42-8-60.
The maximum sentence which may be imposed for a misdemeanor is a $1,000 fine, 12 months imprisonment, or both. OCGA § 17-10-3(a). Defendant was given a 12 month probated sentence and once service of that sentence began it could not exceed the maximum sentence which could have been imposed. Tenney v. State, 194 Ga.App. 820, 822(3), 392 S.E.2d 294 (1990). Once the sentence was served, jurisdiction over the defendant ceased. Strickland v. State, 165 Ga.App. 197, 200(2), 300 S.E.2d 537 (1983). The court having no jurisdiction over him or his case, the motion to modify was a nullity as well as the judgment entered purporting to modify the sentence. OCGA § 17-9-4. Additionally, defendant cited no authority for such a motion and we are aware of none. Cf. OCGA § 17-9-61 (); Thigpen v. State, 165 Ga.App. 837, 838, 303 S.E.2d 81 (1983) ().
Therefore, the judgment of June 25, 1991 is a nullity and the court is directed to strike it from the record.
Judgment vacated and case remanded with direction.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sentinel Offender Svcs., LLC v. Glover, s. S14A1033
...1 (1998) (requiring State to seek probation revocation within the period of probation as required by statute); State v. Mohamed, 203 Ga.App. 21, 416 S.E.2d 358 (1992).Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's holding that the private probation statutory framework does not allow for the tolli......
-
In re Interest of J. M. A.
...served, the sentencing court loses jurisdiction over the criminal defendant to modify or alter the sentence. State v. Mohamed , 203 Ga.App. 21, 21 (2), 416 S.E.2d 358 (1992). See Sentinel Offender Svcs., LLC v. Glover , 296 Ga. 315, 329 (3) (b), 766 S.E.2d 456 (2014) ("[O]nce a sentence has......
-
Guice v. State, A06A2075.
...is not an appropriate remedy in a criminal case after passage of the term in which the judgment was entered. State v. Mohamed, 203 Ga.App. 21(2), 416 S.E.2d 358 (1992). An exception exists where a sentence is void, i.e., where the court has imposed punishment which the law does not allow. C......
-
Battle v. State
...v. State, 225 Ga.App. XXVII (1997) relying on Cabell v. State, 221 Ga.App. 192, 471 S.E.2d 222 (1996). 2. See State v. Mohamed, 203 Ga.App. 21(2), 416 S.E.2d 358 (1992), citing Thigpen v. State, 165 Ga.App. 837, 838, 303 S.E.2d 81 (1983). 3. Crumbley v. State, 261 Ga. 610, 611(1), 409 S.E.2......