Cedric Arrington v. State
A17A0591
| Ga. Ct. App. | Dec 7, 2016Background
- In 2009 Cedric Arrington pled guilty to armed robbery and was sentenced to 18 years' imprisonment.
- In 2016 Arrington filed a motion to vacate a void sentence, arguing his sentence was void for several reasons.
- He alleged ineffective assistance of counsel and an irregular plea process affecting voluntariness.
- He contended the indictment was defective for omitting a separate firearms-possession charge and claimed his sentence exceeded statutory maximum.
- The trial court denied the motion; Arrington appealed to the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
- The Court of Appeals considered whether Arrington raised a colorable void-sentence claim, which is prerequisite to appellate jurisdiction over such motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence is void so as to permit review of motion to vacate | Arrington: sentence void due to ineffective assistance and irregular plea process | State: claims challenge conviction, not sentence; sentence within statutory range | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; not a colorable void-sentence claim |
| Whether alleged ineffective assistance can render sentence void | Arrington: counsel defects made plea/conviction invalid, so sentence void | State: ineffective-assistance attacks conviction, not sentence validity | Court: such claims challenge conviction, not a void sentence; not cognizable in this procedure |
| Whether a defective indictment (omitting firearm-possession charge) voids the sentence | Arrington: indictment defect means sentence invalid | State: omission relates to additional charge, not the charge convicted | Court: complaint doesn’t affect validity of the sentence imposed on the charged offense |
| Whether the 18-year term exceeded statutory maximum for armed robbery | Arrington: sentence exceeded maximum allowed | State: armed robbery punishable by life or 10–20 years; 18 years within range | Court: Sentence within statutory range; therefore not void |
Key Cases Cited
- Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216 (motion to vacate/modify conviction not appropriate; only colorable void-sentence claims are reviewable)
- Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532 (appeal from denial of petition to vacate conviction must be dismissed)
- Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118 (appeal dismissed where no colorable void-sentence claim)
- von Thomas v. State, 293 Ga. 569 (void-sentence motions limited to claims that sentence is unauthorized by law)
- Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669 (sentence within statutory range is not void)
- Jordan v. State, 253 Ga. App. 510 (ineffective assistance challenges convictions, not sentences)