Charlie D. Carter v. State
A25A1757
Ga. Ct. App.Jun 17, 2025Background
- Charlie D. Carter was convicted by a jury of two counts of child molestation occurring between 2010 and 2012, receiving consecutive 15-year prison sentences.
- In 2015, Carter’s convictions were affirmed by the Georgia Court of Appeals.
- In 2019, Carter successfully moved to partially vacate his sentence as void, resulting in modified split sentences of 15 years each (14 years in prison, 1 year on probation for each count), with a partially concurrent structure.
- In 2025, Carter filed a new motion to vacate his sentence as void and to run his sentences concurrently, which was denied by the trial court.
- Carter appealed, but the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sentence is void due to improper split terms | Carter argued the probated portion should only apply to the final consecutive sentence under the amended statute | State argued statute did not apply retroactively | Court held the statute was amended after Carter's crimes; sentences were not void. |
| Whether sentences should run concurrently | Carter argued for concurrent sentences | State argued sentencing choice is within trial court's discretion | Court held decision on concurrent vs. consecutive is within trial court’s discretion. |
| Whether sentence void absent presentencing hearing | Carter claimed lack of hearing made the sentence void | State argued this is a procedural issue | Court found this is a procedural, not voidness, issue and cannot be a basis for post-appeal modification. |
| Appellate jurisdiction over sentence modification | Carter sought review outside statutory window | State argued past deadline | Court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; no colorable void sentence claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669 (Ga. 2004) (Defines a void sentence as one imposing punishment not permitted by law; procedural challenges do not establish voidness)
- Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010) (Establishes time limits for trial court sentence modification and the rule for appellate jurisdiction over such modifications)
- Osborne v. State, 318 Ga. App. 339 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012) (Affirms trial court’s discretion to impose consecutive versus concurrent sentences)