# 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 A0 10 6 . CRAI G L. J ONES v . THE STATE.

In 2 0 1 2 , Crai g J o n es p l ed g u i l ty t o bat t ery , cri m i n al t res p as s , an d ag g rav at ed

s t al k in g

. 1 In 20 1 7

, J o n es , a p ri so n i n m at e, at t em p t ed t o fi l e a “ Pet i t i o n fo r Un d er t h e
Hag ue Co n v en t i o n T i t l e 1 8 § 1 7 8 1 [s i c] .” Th e t ri al co u rt co n st ru ed t h e p et i t i o n as a

p ro p os ed ci v i l act i on an d d en i ed fi l i n g o f th e p et i t i o n u n d er OCGA § 9 -1 5 -2 (d ), o n

t h e g ro u n d t hat i t s ho wed a co m p l et e ab s en ce o f an y ju st i ci ab l e i s s u e o f l aw o r fact

. J o n es t h en fi led a no t i ce o f ap p eal t o Su prem e Co u rt

, wh i ch t ran s ferred t h e ap p eal to

t h i s Co u rt . W e l ack ju ri sd i ct i o n

. Becau s e J on es i s i n carcerat ed

, h i s ap p eal i s co n tro l l ed b y t h e Pri s o n Li t i g at i o n

Refo rm Act o f 1 9 9 6

, OCGA § 4 2 -1 2 -1 et s eq

. Un d er OCGA § 4 2 -1 2 -8

, an ap p eal o f

1 Si n ce t h en , J on es h as b een b efo re th i s Co urt n u m ero u s t i m es

. He fi l ed t wo d i rect ap peal s

– o n e fro m t h e t ri al c o u r t ’s o r d er d en y in g h i s m o t i o n to m od i fy h i s

s en t en ce, an d an o t h er fro m t h e d en i al o f h i s req u es t fo r a h eari n g

– b ot h o f wh i ch we d i s m i s s ed as u n t im el y

. Jo nes v. S t a te

, No

. A1 4 A 1 5 5 4 (M ay 6

, 2 01 4 ); Jo n es v. S t a t e , No

. A1 4 A1 55 6 (M ay 6, 2 0 1 4 ). W e s i m i l arl y d i s m i s s ed as u nt im el y J o n es ’ s

ap p li cat io n fo r d i s cret io nary rev i ew o f t h e d en i al of h is m ot i o n fo r m i n u t es of a g ran d ju ry p ro ceed i n g

. Jo n es v. S t a t e , No

. A1 5D0 4 5 9 (J u ly 9

, 20 1 5 ). J o n es al s o fi l ed an

ap p eal fro m t h e d en i al o f hi s p et i t i o n fo r a w ri t o f m an d am u s , wh i ch we tran s ferred

t o t h e Su prem e Co u rt

, Jo n es v. S t a t e , No

. A1 4A1 5 5 5 (M ay 5, 2 0 1 4 ), wh i ch

, i n t u rn , d i s m i s s ed t h e ap p eal

, Jo n es v. Ha r d y , No

. S1 4 A 1 4 59 (J u l y 3 1

, 2 0 1 4 ). Th i s Co u rt

s u b s eq u en t l y d i s m i s s ed J o n es ’ s ap p eal s fro m th e t ri al co urt ’ s o rd ers : (i ) d en y i n g y et

a n o t h e r m o t io n t o m o di fy a v o i d s en t en ce, Jo n es v. S t a t e , N o

. A 1 6 A1 7 5 7 (J u n e 2,

2 0 1 6 ); (i i ) d en y in g J o nes ’ s m o t i o n to v acat e a v o i d ju d g m en t

, Jo nes v. S t a t e , No

. A1 7 A0 27 6 (Oct

. 2 0

, 2 0 1 6); an d (i i i ) d e n y in g fi l in g o f hi s m o t i o n t o co rrect t h e

reco rd

, Jo n es v. S t a t e , No . A1 7 A1 5 8 4 (M ay 1 1 , 2 01 7 ). September 05, 2017a ci v i l act i o n fi l ed b y a p ri s o n er “ s h al l b e as p ro v i ded i n Co d e Sect io n 5-6 -3 5 .” An d

u n d er OCGA § 5-6 -3 5 (b ), t h e p a r t y wi s h i ng to ap peal m us t fi l e an ap p li cat i o n fo r

d i s cret i o n ary rev i ew t o t h e ap p ro pri at e ap pel l at e co u rt

. Becau s e a p ri s o n er h as n o

ri gh t of d i rect ap peal in ci v i l cas es , w e l a c k ju ri s di ct i o n t o co ns i d er J o n es ’ s d i rect

ap p eal

, wh i ch i s h ereb y DISM ISSED. See Jo n es v. To wn s en d

, 2 6 7 Ga. 4 8 9, 4 9 0 (4 8 0

SE2 d 2 4 ) (1 9 9 7 ).

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 tn 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

. 09/05/2017