Sign In
Events
Newsletters
Search

Close

Close Search

Cancel

SEARCH
MY LAW.COMNEW

Smith v. Gwinnett County

The state court lacked jurisdiction to consider defendants' petition for writ of certiorari from their convictions in the recorder's court.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A Gwinnett County recorder’s court found C. W. Smith and Bobby Cochran guilty of violating a Gwinnett County ordinance. Smith and Cochran appealed the convictions by filing a petition for writ of certiorari in the State Court of Gwinnett County. In the petition, Smith and Cochran raised the sufficiency of the evidence and other grounds. Gwinnett County moved to dismiss the petition. It claimed that Smith and Cochran had failed to assert errors by the trial court with specificity, urged that the correct burden of proof had been applied by the recorder’s court, and essentially denied Smith’s and Cochran’s other allegations. After hearing arguments, the state court dismissed the petition without stating its reasons for doing so. Smith and Cochran appeal from that dismissal.

1. Smith and Cochran correctly contend that the state court lacked jurisdiction to consider their petition for writ of certiorari.1 As this Court recently decided, a state court is without jurisdiction to consider a petition for writ of certiorari from a conviction in the recorder’s court.2 Instead, such an appeal is to be made by writ of certiorari to the superior court.3 The state court, therefore, lacked jurisdiction over the case.

Trending Stories

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

LEARN MORE

More From ALM

Premium Subscription
With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now
Team Accounts
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now
Bundle Subscriptions
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now
Go to CLE Center
Southeastern Legal Awards 2025
May 01, 2025
Atlanta, GA

The Daily Report is honoring those attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession.


Learn More
Complex Claims & Litigation Forum 2025
February 24, 2025 - February 26, 2025
Las Vegas, NV

This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.


Learn More
Legalweek Leaders in Tech Law Awards 2025
March 24, 2025
New York, NY

Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.


Learn More
Go to Events Go to Webcasts
Legal Counsel

Title: Legal Counsel Reports to: Chief Executive Officer (CEO) FLSA Status: Exempt, Full Time Supervisory Responsibility: N/A Location: Remo...


Apply Now ›
Associate Position

Blume Forte Fried Zerres and Molinari 1 Main Street Chatham, NJ 07945Prominent Morris County Law Firm with a state-wide personal injury prac...


Apply Now ›
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY DEFENSE LITIGATION

d Arcambal Ousley & Cuyler Burk, LLP, a well-established women-owned litigation firm, has an opening in our Parsippany, NJ office. We of...


Apply Now ›
Go to Lawjobs