# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 D0 00 5 . CHARLES EDW I N MASON v . THE STATE.

In 2 0 1 3

, a ju ry fo u n d C h a r l es Ed wi n M as o n g u i l t y o f o n e co u n t o f b u rg l ary ,

o n e co u n t o f cri m i n al t res p as s, t wo co un t s o f p o s s es s i o n of t o o ls fo r t h e co m m i s s i o n

o f a cri m e, o n e co u nt o f fel on y t h e f t b y t a k i n g , an d t wo co u n t s of fo rg ery i n t h e

s eco n d d eg ree. Hi s co n vi ct i o ns were affi rm ed on ap p eal

, an d th e rem i t t i t u r w as d at ed

S e p t em b er 2 9

, 2 0 1 4

. M

a s o n v. S t a t e , 3 2 5 Ga. A p p

. 6 0 9 (7 5 4 SE2 d 3 97 ) ( 2 0 1 4 )

. M as o n s u b s eq u en t l y fi led a p ro s e m o t i o n t o v acat e a v oi d j u d gm en t

, w h i ch t h e t ri al

co u rt d en i ed

. On J a n u ary 2 8

, 20 1 5

, we di s m i s s ed M as o n ’ s ap p l i cat i o n fo r

d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal fro m t h at o rd er. See Cas e No

. A1 5 D 0 2 23

. Mas o n t h en fi l ed a p ro

s e m ot i o n t o co rrect s en t en ce, wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt d en ied

. T h is ap p l i c at i o n s eek s

rev i ew o f t h e t ri al co urt ’ s d en i al o f t h at m o t i o n

. W e, h o wev er, l ack ju ri s di ct i o n

. Un d er OCGA § 1 7 -1 0 -1 (f), a co u rt m ay m o d ify a s en t en ce d uri n g t h e ye a r

a f t e r i t s i m p o s i ti o n o r wi t h i n 1 2 0 d ay s aft er rem it t i t u r fo l lo wi n g a di rect ap p eal

, wh i ch ev er i s l at er. Fr az i er v. S t a t e , 3 0 2 Ga. Ap p

. 3 4 6

, 3 4 7

- 3 4 8 (6 91 SE2 d 2 4 7 )

(2 0 1 0); Bu r

g v. S t a t e , 2 9 7 Ga. Ap p

. 1 1 8

, 11 8 (6 7 6 SE2 d 4 6 5 ) ( 2 0 0 9 ). O n ce t h i s

s t at u to ry p eri od ex pi res , as i t h ad h ere wh en M as o n fi l ed h i s m o t io n , a t ri al co u rt m ay

m o di fy a s en t en ce on ly i f i t i s vo i d

. Jo n es v. S t a te

, 2 78 Ga. 6 6 9

, 6 7 0 (6 04 SE2 d 4 8 3 )

(2 0 0 4). A n d a s en t en ce i s v oi d o n ly wh en t he t ri al co u rt i m p o ses p u n i s hm en t t h at t h e

l aw d o es n o t al lo w. Jo r d a n v. S t a t e , 25 3 Ga. Ap p

. 5 1 0

, 5 1 1 (1 ) (5 59 SE2 d 5 2 8 )

(2 0 0 2). “ Mo ti o n s to v acat e a v o i d s en t en ce g en eral l y are l i m it ed to cl ai m s t h at

– ev en

as s u m in g t h e e x i s t e n ce an d v al i d i t y o f th e co n v i ct i o n fo r wh i ch t he s en t en ce was

i m p o s ed

– t h e l aw d o es no t au t h o ri ze t hat sen t en ce, m o s t t y p i cal l y b ecau s e i t ex ceed s

t h e m o s t s ev ere p u ni s hm en t fo r wh i ch t h e ap p l i cab l e pen al s t at u t e pro v id es .” Vo n

Th o ma s v. S t a t e , 2 9 3 Ga. 5 6 9

, 5 7 2 (2 ) (7 4 8 SE2 d 4 4 6 ) ( 2 0 13 ). “ As s ert i o ns t ak i n g September 09, 2015i s su e wi t h t h e p r o c ed u re em p l o y ed i n i m

p o s i ng a v al i d s en t en ce o r q u es ti o n i n g t h e

fai rn es s o f an i m

p o sed s en t en ce d o n o t al l eg e a s en t en ce is v oi d .” Co lema n v. S t a t e , 3 0 5 Ga. Ap p . 6 8 0 , 6 8 0 -6 8 1 (7 0 0 SE2 d 6 68 ) (2 0 1 0 ).

Here, M as o n do es n o t arg u e t h at h i s sen t en ce ex ceed s t h e m o s t s ev ere

p u n i s h m en t fo r wh ich t h e ap p l i cab l e p en al s t at u te p ro v i d es

. Rat h er, h e arg u es t h at h i s

s en t en ce s h o u ld b e co rrect ed b ecau s e t h e t r i a l c o u rt fai l ed t o ex erci s e d i scret i o n in

s en t en ci n g h i m

. Mas o n , h o wev er, was sen t en ced as a reci d i v i s t

, an d un d er t h e

reci di v i s t s t at u t e, “ t h e t ri al j u d ge ma y, i n hi s o r h er d i s cr et i o n , p ro b at e o r s u s p en d t h e

m ax i m u m s en t en ce p res cri b ed fo r t h e o f f e nse

. ” (Em

p h as i s su p pl i ed .) OCGA § 1 7 -1 0

-
7 (a). Mas o n al s o as s ert s t h at h i s s en t en ce co n s t i t u t es cru el an d u n us u al p u n i s h m en t

an d s h o ul d b e red u ced b ecau s e t h e l eg i sl at ure s u b s eq u en t l y r ed u ced th e m ax i m u m

s en t en ce i n h i s t y

p e o f b u rg l ary

cas e, s ee O CGA § 1 6 -7 -1 (c), b ut h e h as p o i n t ed t o

n o ev i d en ce s h o wi n g t h at t h e l eg i s lat u re i n ten d ed an y rev i s ed s en ten ci n g g u i d el i n es

t o b e ap p l ied ret ro act iv el y

. M as o n d o es n o t arg u e th at hi s s en t en ce ex ceed s t h e

s t at u to ry m ax i m

u m i n ex i s t en ce at t h e t i m e he was s en t en ced fo r hi s o ffen s es , an d

“ [t ] h e u n i v e rs al an d wel l-s et t l ed ru l e o f s tat u to ry co n s tru ct i on is t h at l eg i s l at i v e

en act m en t s are no t i n t en d ed t o o p erat e ret ro act i v el y u nl es s t h ere i s a cl ear d i rect i v e

t h at t h ey d o s o , a n d t h at pers o n s wh o co m m i t cri m es are t o b e co n vi ct ed an d

s en t en ced u n d er t he l aws t h at ex i s t ed at t h e t i m e t h e cri m es w ere co m m i t t ed .”

Hu mp h rey v. W

i l s on , 2 8 2 G a. 5 2 0

, 5 2 8 n

. 4 1 (3 ) (c) (6 5 2 SE2 d 5 0 1) (2 0 0 7 ) (ci t at i on s

an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

Becau s e Mas o n has n o t rai s ed a v al id v o i d -s en t en ce cl ai m , we m ay n ot

co n si d er h i s ap p li cat i o n

. See Ha r p er v. S t a t e , 2 8 6 G a. 2 1 6 , 2 1 7 (1 ) (6 86 SE2 d 7 8 6 )

(2 0 0 9). Acco rd i n gl y , t h i s ap pl icat i o n i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 09/09/2015