Opinion
A25A0670
11-21-2024
AJALIN WYNN v. SHIRLENE LOWRY
The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
In June 2024, prison inmate Ajalin Wynn filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus against a Meriwether County Magistrate Court judge. The trial court granted the judge's motion to dismiss the petition, and Wynn filed both an application for discretionary review and a notice of appeal seeking appellate review of the order dismissing his petition. We denied Wynn's discretionary application on the merits, see Wynn v. Lowry, Case No. A25D0092 (Nov. 6, 2024), and the direct appeal has been docketed as the current case, No. A25A0670. We lack jurisdiction.
Wynn directed his application and appeal to the Supreme Court of Georgia, which transferred both matters to this Court. See Wynn v. Lowry, Case No. S25D0129 (Sept. 26, 2024); Wynn v. Lowry, Case No. S25A0122 (Oct. 15, 2024).
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, an appeal in a civil action filed by a prisoner must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review. See OCGA § 42-12-8, cross-referencing OCGA § 5-6-35; Jones v. Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 490 (480 S.E.2d 24) (1997). "Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional." Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga.App. 257, 257 (471 S.E.2d 60) (1996). Because Wynn was incarcerated when he filed this civil action, he has no right to a direct appeal here, and we denied his application for discretionary review. See Jones, 267 Ga. at 490-491; Wynn, Case No. A25D0092.
Moreover, our denial of Wynn's application in Case No. A25D0092 renders the current appeal barred by the law of the case doctrine. See Ross v. State, 310 Ga.App. 326, 327 (713 S.E.2d 438) (2011) ("[A]ny issue that was raised and resolved in an earlier appeal is the law of the case and is binding on this Court ....") (citation and punctuation omitted); accord Hook v. Bergen, 286 Ga.App. 258, 261 (1) (649 S.E.2d 313) (2007) ("[T]he denial of an application for discretionary appeal is an adjudication on the merits of the underlying order and acts as res judicata in subsequent proceedings."); see also Jackson v. State, 273 Ga. 320, 320 (540 S.E.2d 612) (2001) (a defendant "is not entitled to another bite at the apple by way of a second appeal").
For the above reasons, this direct appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.