Scroggins v. StateScroggins v. State
This Court granted a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review that Court‘s
In 2001, Scroggins was convicted of theft by receiving, forgery, and financial transaction card fraud, and sentenced to probation. On August 5, 2008, his probation was revoked. On July 20, 2009, he moved in the trial court for an out-of-time discretionary appeal, and the trial court granted that motion on August 13, 2009. Scroggins‘s subsequent application for discretionary appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeals as untimely from the probation revocation; that Court stated in its order that the trial court did not have the authority to grant an out-of-time discretionary appeal. Upon application to this Court for a writ of certiorari, we granted the writ, directing the parties to address whether a trial court has the authority to grant an out-of-time discretionary appeal.
After the appeal was docketed in this Court, the State moved for this Court to dismiss it as improvidently granted, noting that on September 2, 2008, Scroggins had filed a notice of appeal, stating that appeal was taken from the August 5, 2008 order revoking his probation. No action was taken on this notice of appeal by the trial court clerk, and no direct appeal was ever docketed in the Court of Appeals based upon the September 2, 2008 notice of appeal. The notice of appeal was never addressed by either the Court of Appeals or the trial court.1
An order revoking probation may only be appealed by the discretionary procedures set forth in
However, the State‘s motion to dismiss cannot be granted. “[W]hen a trial court enters a judgment where it does not have jurisdiction, such judgment is a mere nullity; but an appeal from such an illegal judgment will not be dismissed but instead, the void judgment will be reversed. [Cits.]” Darden v. Ravan, 232 Ga. 756, 758(1), 208 S.E.2d 846 (1974). See also Weatherbed v. State, 271 Ga. 736, 738, 524 S.E.2d 452 (1999). Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals dismissing the discretionary application to appeal is reversed, and the case is remanded to that Court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Judgment reversed and case remanded with direction.
All the Justices concur.