Opinion
A23A0946
07-27-2023
ROGER JOSEPH REINERT v. ELLEN MCELYEA et al.
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
In January 2023, Roger Reinert, a prison inmate, filed this pro se petition for original mandamus in this Court against the Superior Court of Cherokee County and Judge Ellen McElyea. In his petition, Reinert states that he filed a mandamus petition in the superior court in July 2022 requesting that the judge rule on the "Motion to Vacate Void Sentence and Void Judgment" he filed in that court. Reinert asks this Court to compel the superior court to decide the mandamus petition he filed in that court as well as the motion to vacate void sentence and void judgment. We lack jurisdiction.
Reinert has filed prior appeals. In Case No. A13A2271, this Court affirmed his convictions (Mar. 7, 2014). In Case No. A20A0492, we dismissed his direct appeal from the denial of his extraordinary motion for new trial (Nov. 7, 2019).
"An appeal becomes moot if the rights insisted upon could not be enforced by a judicial determination." Randolph County v. Johnson, 282 Ga. 160 (1) (646 S.E.2d 261) (2007). "When the remedy sought in litigation no longer benefits the party seeking it, the case is moot and must be dismissed." Jayko v. State, 335 Ga.App. 684, 685 (782 S.E.2d 788) (2016) (citation and punctuation omitted). The superior court has entered an order denying Reinert's motion to vacate void sentence and void judgment, and Reinert has filed a direct appeal from that order. See Case No. A23A1590. Thus, the remedy Reinert sought in superior court by filing the mandamus petition (specifically, an order compelling that court to decide his motion to vacate void sentence and judgment) as well as the remedy sought in this Court by filing an original mandamus petition (namely, an order compelling the superior court to decide his mandamus petition and his motion to vacate), would no longer benefit him, as the underlying motion has now been decided. Because the issue presented has become moot, this petition is subject to dismissal. See OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (3).
Moreover, because Reinert is presently incarcerated, any such appeal is controlled by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq., which requires any appeal in a civil case by a prisoner to come by discretionary application. See OCGA § 42-12-8.
Accordingly, this petition is hereby DISMISSED.