Mobuary v. State

Jason Mobuary pleaded guilty in 2003 to enticing a child for indecent purposes. Years later he asked the trial court for permission to file a late appeal, which the court denied. Mobuary then navigated a complicated series of extension requests and a discretionary appeal application before finally filing his notice of appeal in the trial court. The Court of Appeals of Georgia dismissed his appeal, saying he filed it 167 days late. The Supreme Court of Georgia disagreed. It found that the Court of Appeals overlooked an earlier ruling that gave Mobuary extra time to file, and that the deadline was further paused by statewide judicial emergency orders issued because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Counting that pause, Mobuary's filing was actually on time. The court granted his petition for review, undid the Court of Appeals' dismissal, and sent the case back so his appeal can move forward. Chief Justice Nahmias dissented, arguing the case did not deserve this level of review.

The Court of Appeals wrongly dismissed Mobuary's appeal as untimely because it failed to account for both his earlier discretionary appeal proceeding, which extended his filing deadline, and the tolling of that deadline caused by the Chief Justice's statewide judicial emergency orders during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The ruling clarifies for Georgia litigants, courts, and clerks that the pandemic-era statewide judicial emergency orders actually paused appellate filing deadlines, meaning filings made during that pause should not be treated as late, and it lets Mobuary's appeal proceed.

Petition for writ of certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded

1. The court reviewed the timeline of Mobuary's filings, including his request for an extension to file a discretionary appeal application, which this Court granted, and the Court of Appeals' later order granting him a discretionary appeal with ten days to file a notice of appeal in the trial court.
2. The court explained that the Chief Justice's statewide judicial emergency orders, issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, paused nonconstitutional filing deadlines set by statute or court order, including the ten-day period the Court of Appeals had given Mobuary.
3. Applying that tolling, the court calculated that Mobuary's ten-day filing window did not actually begin until the emergency deadlines were reimposed on July 14, 2020, giving him until July 24, 2020 to file, and the trial court had already docketed his notice of appeal well before that date.
4. Because the Court of Appeals' dismissal order failed to account for the earlier discretionary appeal proceeding and the tolling effect of the emergency orders, the court concluded its finding that the appeal was untimely was clearly erroneous.
5. The court determined that, despite normally denying petitions that seek only correction of an individual error, this case warranted review because it offered a chance to explicitly apply the tolling effect of the judicial emergency orders in a published opinion, which it deemed a matter of great public importance.

• out-of-time appeal
• judicial emergency orders
• COVID-19 court deadlines
• appellate jurisdiction
• certiorari