Jackson v. StateJackson v. State
Curtis Jackson, pro se, appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of his emergency motion to modify and vacate a void sentence pursuant to
The record shows that a jury found Jackson guilty of two counts of receiving stolen property (
1. Jackson contends that the trial court incorrectly dismissed as untimely his motion to modify and vacate sentence. We agree. Under
Therefore, as shown by the chronology set out above, the trial court’s dismissal of Jackson’s motion to modify and correct sentence as untimely was error.
2. Jackson contends that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences. We agree. As correctly concededby the State in its brief, the separate counts of theft by receiving stolen property may merge as a matter of fact, and Jackson cannot be sentenced for two consecutive ten-year terms.
“[W]ith respect to receiving or concealing stolen property ... [if] articles stolen at different times from several persons [are] received and concealed by the same act . . . then there is but one offense.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Hardin v. State,
Therefore, this case must be remanded to the trial court for resentencing consistent with this opinion.
3. We are unable to consider Jackson’s contentions that the trial court was biased and invoked his personal opinion against Jackson during his sentencing hearing, because these questions of whether the sentence was fair do not bear on whether a sentence was void and subject to a sentence modification under
Notes
Jackson’s first appeal was filed untimely, and we dismissed his appeal. See Jackson, supra,