Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1886. BOBBY PARADISE v. THE STATE.

Bobby Paradise appeals the trial court’s denial of his November 2014 motion

for an extension of time to file an out-of-time appeal from the trial court’s November

19, 1998 order denying his extraordinary motion to correctsentence. For the reasons

discussed below, we dismiss Paradise’s appeal as barred by the law of the case and

for lack of jurisdiction.

A jury convicted Paradise in 1993 of four counts each of aggravated child

molestation, aggravated sodomy, and child molestation. See Paradise v. State, 212

Ga. App. 166, 166 (441 SE2d 497) (1994) (“Paradise I”). The trial court sentenced

him to several consecutive terms of life imprisonment for the aggravated sodomy

convictions and several consecutive 20-year terms of imprisonment for the child

molestation convictions, with the final 20 years to be served on probation. We

affirmed Paradise’s convictions and sentences. See id. at 166, 170.

In 1998, Paradise filed an extraordinary motion to correct sentence, arguing

that: (i) his sentences were void because they exceeded the statutory limits; (ii) the

trial court violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights by imposing the

“maximum punishment” for his offenses; (iii) the trial court erred by engaging in

“mechanical sentencing,” by failing to exercise discretion in imposing Paradise’s

sentence, and by basing his sentence on vindictiveness; and (iv) Paradise’s trial

counsel rendered various instances of ineffective assistance during sentencing. The

trial court denied Paradise’s motion in November 1998, but Paradise argues in the

motion that is the subject of the instant appeal that he first learned of the November

July 16, 2015
1998 denial of his extraordinary motion to correctsentence after he filed a motion for

production of documents in October 2014.

In the meantime, Paradise filed additional documents attempting to set aside

his sentence as void. In May 2004, Paradise filed another extraordinary motion to

correctsentence, again arguing that hissentence was void. Paradise v. State, 321 Ga.

App. 371, 372 (740 SE2d 238) (2013) (“Paradise II”). In relevant part, Paradise

contended that his life sentences exceeded the authorized punishment. The trial court

denied the motion in September 2004. Id. Paradise sought review in this Court, but

we dismissed his application for discretionary appeal as untimely. Id. Paradise

moved this Court for reconsideration, which we denied, and he petitioned the

Supreme Court of Georgia for a writ of certiorari, which also was denied. Id.

In November 2006, Paradise filed a motion to vacate a void sentence. Id. The

trial court denied the motion in January 2007, and we dismissed Paradise’s

application for discretionary appeal on the grounds that: (i) he had not raised a valid

void-sentence claim in the motion; and (ii) he already had pursued a direct appeal. 

Id. We denied Paradise’s motion for reconsideration, and the Supreme Court denied

his application for a writ of certiorari. Id. At about the same time, Paradise filed a

direct appeal of the same January 2007 order, which we dismissed as untimely. Id.

Again in February 2012, Paradise filed a motion to vacate a void sentence,

arguing that his sentences: (i) violated the right to be free from double jeopardy;

(ii) were motivated by vindictiveness; and (iii) violated the Eighth Amendment. The

trial court denied this motion in March 2012, and we dismissed Paradise’ssubsequent

appeal as barred by the law of the case. See id. at 372-373.

Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year

after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal,

whichever is later. See Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 348 (691 SE2d 247)

(2010). Once this statutory period expires, a trial court may modify only a void

sentence. Id. A direct appeal does not lie from the denial of a motion to modify a

sentence filed outside the statutory time period unless the motion raises a colorable

claim that the sentence is, in fact, void. Id. Under the law-of-the-case doctrine, any
issue that was raised and resolved in an earlier appeal—even where the prior appeal

was dismissed without reaching the merits of the appeal—is the law of the case and

is binding on this Court. See Paradise II, supra at 373;see also OCGA § 9-11-60 (h).

Paradise’s November 2014 motion for an extension of time to file an out-oftime appeal—the denial of which is the subject of the instant appeal—essentially

sought permission to file an out-of-time appeal alleging errors in his sentence. Each

substantive claimParadise seeksto raise in such an appeal, however, is barred. Given

our previous rulings on Paradise’s prior void-sentence claims, his current argument

that his sentence is void is barred by the law of the case. See Paradise II, supra at

371-373 (“[W]ith regard to any argument that Paradise’s sentence is void, we must

conclude that the issue has already been litigated and cannot be raised again.”). Any

other sentencing claims Paradise may wish to raise are well outside of the time limit

within which a trial court may modify or vacate a sentence for any other reason. See

OCGA § 17-10-1 (f); Frazier, supra at 348. Consequently, this appeal is

DISMISSED as barred by the law of the case and for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

07/16/2015