Witherspoon v. State, 818 S.E.2d 512 (Ga. 2018). · Go Syfert
Search
Witherspoon v. State, 818 S.E.2d 512 (Ga. 2018). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Quincy Jones v. State (gactapp, 2020-03-05)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Quincy Jones v. State
Ga. Ct. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
Where, as in the present case, the defendant fails to present a cognizable void- sentence claim, the trial court does not have jurisdiction of the motion. von Thomas, 11 293 Ga. at 571 (2). “[A]lthough a trial court should ‘dismiss’ rather than ‘deny’ a motion it lacks jurisdiction to consider, we will vacate only when the court considers the merits of that motion.” (Citation omitted.) Witherspoon v. State, 304 Ga. 306, 307 ( 818 SE2d 512 ) (2018).
examined Cited "see" Ware v. State (6×)
Ga. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Witherspoon v. State, 304 Ga. 306, 307 ( 818 SE2d 512 ) (2018).
discussed Cited "see" Billy Edgar Murrell v. State (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
Furthermore, it is well established that “[a] motion in arrest of judgment must be made during the term at which the judgment was obtained.”6 And here, the State filed 6 OCGA § 17-9-61 (b); see Witherspoon v. State, 304 Ga. 306, 307 ( 818 SE2d 512 ) (2018) (“We do not reach the merits of [appellant’s] arguments on appeal, because the untimeliness of his motions precluded any relief.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WITHERSPOON
v.
The STATE.
S18A0887.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Aug 20, 2018.
818 S.E.2d 512
Rufus Charles Witherspoon, GDC# 614079, Dodge State Prison, PO Box 276, Chester, Georgia 31012, for Appellant., Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula Khristian Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, 40 Capitol Square, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30334, Jacquelyn Lee Johnson, District Attorney, BRUNSWICK JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, P.O. Box 369, Woodbine, Georgia 31569, Andrew J. Ekonomou, BRUNSWICK JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Glynn County Courthouse, 701 H Street, Box 301, Brunswick, Georgia 31520, for Appellee.
Peterson.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
Peterson, Justice.

[*513] [*306] Rufus Charles Witherspoon appeals pro se from the denial of his motions in arrest of judgment, which he filed approximately 27 years after his convictions. Because the trial court correctly concluded that Witherspoon's motions were untimely, we affirm.

In 1990, a jury found Witherspoon guilty of two counts of felony murder and other crimes in relation to the shooting death of a single[*307] victim. Witherspoon appealed, and we affirmed his convictions. See Witherspoon v. State, 262 Ga. 2, 412 S.E.2d 829 (1992). Witherspoon later filed several motions challenging his convictions, arguing, among other things, that the trial court erred in sentencing him on both felony murder counts and that the error subjected him to double jeopardy. The trial court dismissed his motions for lack of jurisdiction, but vacated the sentence imposed on one felony murder count.[1] In November 2017, Witherspoon filed two motions in arrest of judgment, again raising claims related to the trial court's initial failure to merge the two felony murder counts. The trial court denied the motions as untimely, and this appeal ensued.

We do not reach the merits of Witherspoon's arguments on appeal, because the untimeliness of his motions precluded any relief. OCGA § 17-9-61 (b) requires that a motion in arrest of judgment "be made during the term in which the judgment was obtained." Witherspoon's convictions were entered on November 28, 1990, during the October term of the Appling County Superior Court that expired in February 1991. See OCGA § 15-6-3 (7) (A). Witherspoon filed his motions in November 2017, almost 27 years after the expiration of the term in which he was convicted. Because Witherspoon's motions were untimely, the trial court lacked authority to grant any relief, and it properly disposed of his motions on this basis. See Brooks v. State, 301 Ga. 748, 752 (2), 804 S.E.2d 1 (2017) (providing that although a trial court should "dismiss" rather than "deny" a motion it lacks jurisdiction to consider, we will vacate only when the court considers the merits of that motion). Therefore, we affirm.

Judgment affirmed.

Hines, C.J., Melton, P.J., Benham, Hunstein, Nahmias, Blackwell, and Boggs, JJ., concur.

1

Witherspoon filed a discretionary application from the dismissal of one of those motions, and we dismissed that application.