Merilien v. State

In 2006, Jean Jocelyn Merilien pleaded guilty in Rockdale County to two counts of murder and a firearms charge and was sentenced to life plus five years. He never appealed. Almost 19 years later, in September 2025, he asked a superior court for permission to file a late notice of appeal under a Georgia law, O.C.G.A. § 5-6-39.1, that lets defendants seek that kind of relief within certain time limits. The trial court dismissed his request, saying it lacked jurisdiction (legal authority) to even consider it. Merilien appealed that dismissal to the Supreme Court of Georgia. The court agreed with the trial court: the statute only allows such motions within 100 days after the normal appeal deadline passes, or, in some cases, until June 30, 2026, if an earlier attempt was dismissed under a prior Supreme Court ruling called Cook v. State. Merilien met neither condition, so his motion was properly thrown out.

A trial court lacks jurisdiction to grant leave to file an out-of-time notice of appeal unless the defendant's motion is filed within 100 days after the normal appeal deadline expires, or, for certain defendants whose earlier out-of-time appeal attempts were dismissed under Cook v. State, by June 30, 2026.

The ruling confirms that Georgia's new law allowing late appeals has strict deadlines that courts cannot waive. People convicted decades ago who never appealed, and who did not previously have a motion dismissed under the Cook decision, cannot use this law to revive their appeal rights now.

Affirmed

1. The court recalled that in Cook v. State it had held trial courts have no inherent jurisdiction (legal power to act) to consider motions for leave to file a late notice of appeal.
2. In response, the General Assembly passed O.C.G.A. § 5-6-39.1, which gives trial courts jurisdiction to hear such motions, but only within specific time windows.
3. Under that statute, a defendant must move within 100 days after the normal deadline to appeal expires, or, if he previously had an out-of-time appeal motion dismissed because of the Cook ruling, by June 30, 2026.
4. The court explained that these filing deadlines are jurisdictional, meaning a court simply has no authority to hear a late motion that misses them, just as with other statutory appeal deadlines.
5. Applying this rule, the court found Merilien's 2025 motion came far more than 100 days after his 2006 conviction became final, and nothing in the record showed he had an earlier motion dismissed under Cook.
6. Because Merilien satisfied neither time limit, the trial court correctly ruled it had no jurisdiction to consider his motion and properly dismissed it.

• out-of-time appeal
• murder conviction
• jurisdiction
• Cook v. State
• filing deadlines