Jones v. the State
340 Ga. App. 101
Ga. Ct. App.2017Background
- Earl Ezzard Jones pled guilty in April 2009 to aggravated battery, aggravated assault (merged for sentencing) and criminal damage to property; sentenced to concurrent terms with 1 year to serve and the remainder probated.
- In December 2010 the State petitioned to revoke Jones’s probation for violating conditions, including committing an aggravated assault in October 2010 and failing to pay monthly probation fees; the trial court revoked probation on May 19, 2011.
- Jones attempted to appeal the revocation in June 2011, but his notice was incomplete; the appeals clerk repeatedly requested amendment before the appeals court would proceed.
- Jones filed a motion to modify/correct his sentence in March/October 2013/2015 arguing the revocation sentence was void because he was later acquitted of the underlying charges and that OCGA § 42-8-34.1 limited revocation to two years in some circumstances; the trial court denied relief.
- Jones filed various notices of appeal and an application for discretionary appeal; this Court dismissed prior appeals for lack of jurisdiction and again dismissed the present appeal because appeals from probation revocations require discretionary review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court’s revocation-based sentence is directly appealable | Jones: Sentence is void because he was later acquitted of the charges used to revoke probation; sentence exceeds permitted revocation under OCGA § 42-8-34.1 | State: Revocation was proper based on trial court’s finding by preponderance of evidence; later dismissal/acquittal does not undo revocation | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction: appeals from probation revocations are subject to discretionary review, not direct appeal |
| Whether the trial court could revoke more than two years of probation under OCGA § 42-8-34.1 | Jones: Statute limits revocation to two years (or lesser of balance or max sentence) and thus his confinement was unauthorized | State: Trial court’s revocation was authorized under applicable statutory scheme and prior revocation finding | Court did not reach merits due to jurisdictional bar; motion to correct void sentence was not directly appealable |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Sims, 277 Ga. 240 (trial court’s preponderance finding controls despite later dismissal of charges)
- White v. State, 233 Ga. App. 873 (appeals from probation revocation subject to discretionary review)
- Jones v. State, 322 Ga. App. 269 (denial of motion to correct sentence after revocation not subject to direct appeal)
- Todd v. State, 236 Ga. App. 757 (same; post-revocation sentencing challenges require discretionary review)