In the middle of his trial on numerous felonies in 1999,
1. Spencer contends that the trial court should have held a hearing on his motion for an out-of-time appeal, and that his right to an appeal was frustrated by his trial counsel’s ineffective assistance. The trial court was not required to hold an evidentiary hearing, however, because Spencer was not entitled to a direct appeal from his guilty pleas based on the existing record, as discussed infra.
Upperman v. State,
Since [Spencer] had no right to file even a timely notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction entered on this guilty plea, he was not entitled to be informed of a nonexistent “right” to appeal. It follows that the trial court correctly denied [Spencer’s] motion to file an out-of-time appeal in this case. [Spencer’s] only available remedy is habeas corpus.
Morrow v. State,
A sentence is void if the court imposes punishment that the law does not allow.
Jones v. State,
Spencer’s argument on appeal that his aggravated assault convictions should have been merged into his armed robbery convictions is a challenge to his conviction, not the sentence; thus, the failure to merge would not render the sentence void. See
Williams v. State,
supra,
Judgment affirmed.
