Clark v. the State
328 Ga. App. 268
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- In March 2012 Kirvin Clark pled guilty to one count of child molestation in Meriwether County and was sentenced to 20 years to serve.
- Six months later Clark moved to correct an illegal/void sentence, arguing the sentence conflicted with OCGA §§ 16-6-4(b)(1) and 17-10-6.2(b).
- Trial court denied the motion, concluding the 20-year term was permissible under OCGA § 16-6-4(b)(1).
- Clark appealed, asserting (1) the statute mandates a split sentence including the mandatory minimum imprisonment and at least one year probation, and (2) the trial court failed to consider deviation under OCGA § 17-10-6.2(c)(1).
- The Court of Appeals vacated the 20-year sentence and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Clark's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Clark’s 20-year all-incarceration sentence was illegal under OCGA § 17-10-6.2(b) | § 17-10-6.2(b) requires a split sentence: minimum term of imprisonment (5 years) plus at least one year probation, so a straight 20-year term is void | The sentence fell within the statutory maximum under OCGA § 16-6-4(b)(1) and was therefore lawful | Court: § 17-10-6.2(b) unambiguously requires a split sentence; Clark’s 20-year straight term is void — sentence vacated |
| Whether the trial court was required to impose only the statutory minimum jail term (5 years) before probation | Clark urged the court must impose the minimum term (5 years) followed by probation | State relied on precedent allowing a split sentence that includes at least the minimum term (not necessarily exactly the minimum) | Court: statute requires at least the minimum term in the split sentence; trial court may impose a split sentence that includes at least five years and at least one year probation (consistent with Bowen) |
| Whether the trial court failed to consider discretion to deviate under OCGA § 17-10-6.2(c)(1) | Trial court should have considered and made findings on whether deviation from mandatory minimum was appropriate | Trial court treated itself as without discretion and did not consider § 17-10-6.2(c) | Court: Trial court erred by not exercising/recording its discretion under § 17-10-6.2(c)(1); this independently requires vacation and remand for resentencing |
| Whether any remaining claims required resolution after those rulings | N/A | N/A | Court: Remaining claims are moot given vacatur and remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Inagawa v. Fayette County, 291 Ga. 715 (court should not construe clear statutory language)
- Bowen v. State, 307 Ga. App. 204 (§ 17-10-6.2(b) mandates a split sentence that includes at least the minimum term)
- Tindell v. State, 314 Ga. App. 91 (trial court must exercise discretion under § 17-10-6.2(c)(1); failure requires vacatur)
- Hedden v. State, 288 Ga. 871 (Supreme Court vacated sentence where court erroneously believed it lacked deviation discretion)
- Marshall v. State, 294 Ga. App. 282 (sentence is void if court imposes punishment the law does not allow)