Ibietatorremendia v. State

2 Citing cases

  1. Bohannon v. State

    203 Ga. App. 783 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 5 times
    In Bohannon v. State, 203 Ga. App. 783 (417 S.E.2d 679) (1992), a majority of this court affirmed the judgment of the trial court on the ground that Bohannon's motion raised only issues that should have been raised in a timely motion for new trial and thus he should have sought leave to file an out-of-time appeal instead of filing an extraordinary motion for new trial.

    The opinion in Martin v. State, 185 Ga. App. 145, 146 (1) ( 363 S.E.2d 765) (1987), which regards that case as not separate from the original appeal, does not decide otherwise. The situation in Ibietatorremendia v. State, 174 Ga. App. 786 ( 332 S.E.2d 20) (1985), is not described. In McDonald v. State, 180 Ga. App. 713 ( 350 S.E.2d 581) (1986), the extraordinary motion for new trial "was filed and determined after the filing of his appeal from his trial and conviction.

  2. AAA Van Servs., Inc. v. Willis

    354 S.E.2d 631 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)

    We are without jurisdiction over this direct appeal since defendant did not file an application for a discretionary appeal pursuant to OCGA ยง 5-6-35 (a) (7). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. Ibietatorremendia v. State, 174 Ga. App. 786 ( 332 S.E.2d 20). 2.