Conner v. State

Lee Edward Conner was convicted of malice murder in Columbia County in 2022. His lawyer filed a motion for new trial, which the trial court denied that September, but no notice of appeal was ever filed at the time. More than three years later, in December 2025, Conner's new lawyer asked the trial court for permission to file a late notice of appeal, and the State agreed to it. The trial court granted the request in January 2026, and Conner then filed his appeal. The Supreme Court of Georgia explained that Georgia law allows a defendant to ask for a late appeal only within 100 days after the original appeal deadline passed, unless a separate exception tied to a prior case (Cook v. State) applies. Conner's request came years past that 100-day window, and the Cook exception did not apply to him. The court held that the trial court never had authority to grant the request in the first place.

The court held that the 100-day deadline in OCGA § 5-6-39.1(a)(1) for seeking leave to file an out-of-time notice of appeal is jurisdictional, so a trial court has no authority to grant such a request once that period has expired, regardless of the State's consent.

The ruling reinforces that Georgia's 100-day deadline for seeking a late appeal is a strict jurisdictional limit that even prosecutorial consent cannot excuse. Defendants, defense lawyers, and prosecutors statewide must treat that window as firm, or risk having appeals dismissed no matter how long ago a conviction became final.

Appeal dismissed, trial court order vacated, and case remanded

1. Georgia law lets a defendant ask a trial court for permission to file a late motion for new trial or notice of appeal, but under OCGA § 5-6-39.1(a)(1) that request must be made within 100 days after the original appeal deadline expired.
2. A separate path under OCGA § 5-6-39.1(b) allows late appeals tied to cases dismissed because of the court's 2022 decision in Cook v. State, which held there is no legal basis for out-of-time appeal motions in trial courts, but only until June 30, 2026.
3. The court found Conner relied on the 100-day path, not the Cook exception, since there was no earlier dismissal of an out-of-time appeal request in his case.
4. Because Conner's December 2025 request came more than three years after his October 2022 appeal deadline expired, it fell far outside the 100-day window, and the State's consent to the request could not fix that timing problem.
5. Relying on its recent decision in Merilien v. State, the court held that this 100-day time limit is jurisdictional, meaning a trial court simply lacks the power to consider or grant a late request filed after the deadline.
6. Because the trial court ruled on the merits of a request it had no authority to grant, the proper remedy was to vacate that order and send the case back so the trial court can instead dismiss the request, which in turn meant Conner's later notice of appeal was untimely and his appeal had to be dismissed.

• out-of-time appeal
• malice murder conviction
• appeal deadline
• jurisdiction of trial courts