# 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 8 D0 10 7 . DARREN D. RI GGS v . THE STATE.

In 2 0 1 0 , Darren D. Ri g g s en t ered a n o n -n eg o t i at ed p l ea t o m u l t i pl e o ffen s es

,

i n cl u d i n g ch i l d m o les tat i o n an d m ak i n g a f a l s e s t at em en t

. He was s en t en ced t o 5 0

y ears

, wi t h 3 0 y ea r s t o s e r v e i n p ri s o n

. Th e t ri al co u rt d en i ed Ri g g s’ s m o t i o n to

wi t h d raw h i s p l ea, an d we affi rm ed o n ap p eal

. See Ri g gs v. St a t e

, 3 1 9 Ga. A p p

. 1 8 9

(7 3 3 SE2 d 8 3 2 ) (2 0 1 2 ). On No v em b er 15

, 2 0 1 3

, R i g g s fi l ed a “ Mo t i o n t o Red uce

Sen ten ce,” wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed

. On a p p e a l

, w e vacat ed i n p art Ri g g s ’ s

s en t en ce, co n cl u d i n g t hat h i s s en t en ce v i o lat ed O C G A § 1 7

- 1 0 -6 .2 (b ) b ecau s e t h e

t ri al co u rt fai l ed t o s en t en ce h i m t o s p l i t s en ten ces fo r h i s s ex u al o ffen s e co nv i ct i o n s

.

See Ri g gs v. S t a t e

, A1 5 A 2 33 8 (d ec i d ed M arch 4, 20 1 6). W e rem an d ed t o t h e t ri al

co u rt fo r res en t en ci n g

, an d t h e cas e rem ai n s p en d i ng b el o w.

In M ay 2 01 7

, Ri g g s fi l ed a m o t i o n t o recu s e t he t ri al ju d g e i n h i s cri m i n al

p ro ceed in g s

. He al s o fi l e d a “ M o t i o n i n L i m i n e,” u rg i n g t h e t ri al co u rt t o i s s u e a

c e r t i f i c a t e o f i m

m ed i at e rev i ew o n hi s m o t i o n t o recu s e. Fo l l owi n g th e t ri al co urt ’ s

d en ial o f b o t h m o t i o ns

, Ri g g s fi l ed t h e i n s t an t ap p l icat i o n fo r d is cret i o n ary rev i ew.

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

.

Th e o rd ers t h at R i g g s s eek s t o ap p eal are i n terl o cu t o ry

. See OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4

(a) (1 ) (p ro v i d i n g fo r a d i rect ap p eal fro m a “ fi n al ju d g m en t [ ] , t h at i s t o s ay , wh ere

t h e cas e i s n o l o n ger pen d i n g i n t h e co u rt bel o w”); Mu r ph y v. Mu r p h y

, 3 2 2 G a. Ap p.

8 2 9

, 8 3 0 (7 4 7 SE2 d 21 ) ( 2 0 1 3 ) (An o rd er den y i n g a m o t i o n t o recu s e i s

i n t erl o cu t o ry ). At t he ti m e Ri g g s fi l ed h i s i n st an t ap p l i cat io n

, h e was s t i l l awai t i n g

res en t en ci n g i n t h e t r i a l co u rt

. Th erefo re, i n o rd er to o b t ai n ap p el l at e rev i ew o f h i s

recu s al req u es t an d h i s “ M o t i o n i n Li m i n e,” Ri gg s w as req u i red to fo l l o w t h e October 04, 2017i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal p ro ced u re s et fo rt h i n OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ). See B ai ley v. Ba i l ey

,

2 6 6 Ga. 83 2

, 8 33 (4 7 1 SE2 d 2 1 3 ) (1 9 9 6 ) (wh ere co n t es t ed ord er i s i n t e r l o c u t o ry

,

d i s cret i o n ary ap peal s t at u t e d o es n o t ex cu se fai l u re t o co m pl y wi t h OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4

(b )). Here, t h e t ri al co u rt h as n o t i s su ed a cert i fi cat e o f i m m e d i a t e rev i ew. Ri g g s ’ s

fai l u re t o fo l l o w t h e p ro p er ap p el l at e p ro ced u re dep ri v es u s o f ju ri s d ict i on to co n s i d er

h i s ap p li cat i o n

. See W

a r r i n g er v. W

a r ri n g er

, 2 0 4 Ga. A p p

. 86

, 86 ( 4 1 8 S E 2 d 4 4 6 )

(1 9 9 2). Acco rd i n gl y , h i s ap p li cat 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 ti fy t h a t t h 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 t n e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th 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

. 10/04/2017