David Rocha entered a negotiated guilty plea in the Superior Court of Hall County to trafficking methamphetamine, OCGA § 16-13-31 f, with a quantity of more than 200 grams but less than 400 grams; and possession of cocaine, OCGA § § 16-13-26 1 D; 16-13-30 a. The trial court subsequently denied Rocha’s pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea. In Case No. A07A0962, Rocha appeals this order. The trial court later denied Rocha’s motion to vacate the order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. In Case No. A07A0963, Rocha appeals the latter order. We have consolidated these cases for appeal. In Case No. A07A0962, having found no error in the order denying Rocha’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, we affirm. For the reasons explained in Division 1 b, infra, we dismiss Case No. A07A0963. 1. The threshold issue before us is whether this Court has authority to exercise appellate jurisdiction over Rocha’s appeals. Veasley v. State , 272 Ga. 837, 838 537 SE2d 42 2000 It is the duty of the appellate court “to raise the question of its jurisdiction in all cases in which there may be any doubt as to the existence of such jurisdiction.” citation and punctuation omitted.
a Case No. A07A0962 presents an issue of whether Rocha’s notice of appeal from the order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea was timely. Under OCGA § 5-6-38 a, “a notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days after entry of the appealable decision or judgment complained of.” See also Veasley v. State , 272 Ga. at 838 “The proper and timely filing of the notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction upon the appellate court.” citation and punctuation omitted; emphasis in original.