Henderson v. State
303 Ga. 241
Ga.2018Background
- In 2011 Henderson pled guilty to felony murder in Rockdale County and was sentenced to life; he did not file a timely direct appeal.
- He later sought collateral relief (motion for out-of-time appeal, habeas petitions) that were denied; this Court affirmed denial of his out-of-time appeal in 2017.
- On March 7, 2017 Henderson filed a pro se motion in the original criminal docket seeking disclosure of grand jury testimony and evidence; the trial court denied the motion and denied his subsequent objection.
- Henderson appealed the denial (notice filed April 10, 2017); the appeal was transferred to the Supreme Court of Georgia under post-2017 jurisdictional rules.
- The Supreme Court first addressed whether it had jurisdiction after OCGA § 15-3-3.1 transferred many categories of appeals to the Court of Appeals, concluding the appeal arises from a murder case and is therefore within the Supreme Court’s retained constitutional murder jurisdiction.
- On the merits the Court held that a post-conviction motion for a trial transcript at public expense filed after the direct-appeal period is not a cognizable remedy without a showing of necessity; because Henderson’s direct appeal time had expired, his motion was a nullity and the appeal was dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Supreme Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over Henderson’s appeal after OCGA § 15-3-3.1 | Henderson appealed from the denial of a motion filed in the original murder prosecution; he proceeded under the criminal docket | State argued OCGA § 15-3-3.1 transfers many matters to Court of Appeals; prior precedent treated similar motions as separate civil actions | Court held it has jurisdiction under Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III(8) (cases arising from murder prosecutions), overruled Coles to the extent it treated such motions as separate civil actions |
| Whether a post-conviction defendant is entitled to a free transcript/record after the direct-appeal period | Henderson sought disclosure of grand jury testimony/transcript at public expense despite not having filed a timely direct appeal | State argued there is no right to a free transcript for collateral proceedings absent necessity; after direct-appeal period such motions are not cognizable | Court held no entitlement to a free transcript for collateral post-conviction motions absent necessity; motion was a nullity and appeal dismissed |
| Whether the Court should treat Henderson’s filings as an original writ/mandamus invoking original jurisdiction | Henderson filed a pro se "Writ of Mandamus/Request for Discovery" invoking OCGA § 9-6-20 and constitutional provisions | State moved to strike; Court noted procedural rules for original mandamus (Graham) were not followed and original jurisdiction is rarely exercised | Court declined to exercise original mandamus jurisdiction; motion procedure defective and State’s motion to strike rendered moot |
| Whether Coles v. State controls characterization of post-conviction transcript motions | Coles treated post-conviction transcript applications as separate civil petitions (mandamus) subject to PLRA procedures | State relied on Coles to place appeal in Court of Appeals framework | Court overruled Coles to the extent it treated post-trial motions filed in the original criminal docket as separate civil actions; retained jurisdiction under murder-case provision |
Key Cases Cited
- Coles v. State, [citation="223 Ga. App. 491"] (Court of Appeals 1996) (treated post-conviction transcript application as separate civil petition in nature of mandamus)
- Mitchell v. State, [citation="280 Ga. 802"] (2006) (indigent appellant entitled to free copy of trial transcript for direct appeal)
- McDowell v. Balkcom, [citation="246 Ga. 611"] (1980) (no due process right to free transcript in collateral proceedings absent necessity)
- Henderson v. State, [citation="300 Ga. 526"] (2017) (this Court’s prior decision affirming denial of Henderson’s out-of-time appeal)
- In re Brinson, [citation="299 Ga. 859"] (2016) (Court’s historic expansive jurisdiction in murder cases)
- Harper v. State, [citation="286 Ga. 216"] (2009) (certain post-conviction remedies not appropriate in criminal case; appeal dismissal)
- Graham v. Cavender, [citation="252 Ga. 123"] (1984) (procedure and rarity of invoking original mandamus jurisdiction)