Background
A grand jury charged Steven Wright with three counts of child molestation, enticing a child for indecent purposes, aggravated child molestation, attempted rape, and attempted incest. Before trial, the trial court granted the State’s request to nolle prosequi the attempted-rape charge.
A jury acquitted Wright of enticing a child for indecent purposes and convicted him on the three child-molestation counts. It could not reach verdicts on aggravated child molestation and attempted incest, and the trial court declared a mistrial on those counts. After sentencing, the trial court denied Wright’s timely motion for new trial, and Wright filed a direct appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The mistrial left two charges pending, and the record did not show that those charges had later been dismissed or nolle prossed. Consequently, the prosecution was not final.
Because the action remained pending in the trial court, Wright could challenge the convictions and sentences only through Georgia’s interlocutory-appeal procedure, including obtaining a certificate of immediate review. His direct appeal without that procedure did not invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.
Key Takeaways
- A mistrial on one or more counts can prevent a criminal case from becoming final for appeal purposes.
- Convictions and sentences on other counts do not create a directly appealable final judgment when mistried counts remain pending.
- A defendant in that posture must follow interlocutory-appeal procedures, including securing a certificate of immediate review.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores a jurisdictional trap in multi-count criminal cases: unresolved counts following a mistrial may foreclose a direct appeal from convictions on the resolved counts. Counsel should confirm the status of every count before filing and, where charges remain pending, pursue the required interlocutory route.