Randall William Nowill, Sr. v. State ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • Court of Appeals
    of the State of Georgia
    ATLANTA,____________________
    September 13, 2018
    The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:
    A19A0261. RANDALL WILLIAM NOWILL, SR. v. THE STATE.
    Randall William Nowill, Sr. was convicted of two counts of aggravated child
    molestation, one count of child molestation, and one count of incest in connection
    with the sexual abuse of his minor daughter. We affirmed his convictions on appeal.
    Nowill v. State, 
    271 Ga. App. 254
     (609 SE2d 188) (2005). Nowill later filed a motion
    to vacate a void sentence, arguing that his sentences should have merged. The trial
    court denied the motion, and Nowill appealed. We dismissed the appeal on the ground
    that merger arguments do not present valid void-sentence claims. See Case No.
    A17A2038 (dismissed July 18, 2017).
    Nowill subsequently filed a second motion to vacate a void sentence, making
    different arguments this time. He also filed a motion to correct the minutes of his
    grand jury proceeding to reflect that his indictment was not returned in open court.
    The trial court entered an order denying both motions, and Nowill appeals. We lack
    jurisdiction.
    With respect to Nowill’s second motion to vacate his sentence, a court may
    modify a sentence during the year after its imposition or within 120 days after
    remittitur following a direct appeal, whichever is later. See OCGA § 17-10-1 (f);
    Frazier v. State, 
    302 Ga. App. 346
    , 348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010). Once, as here, this
    statutory period expires, a trial court may only modify a void sentence. Frazier, 302
    Ga. App. at 348. A sentence is void only if it imposes punishment that the law does
    not allow. Crumbley v. State, 
    261 Ga. 610
    , 611 (1) (409 SE2d 517) (1991). “Motions
    to vacate a void sentence generally are limited to claims that – even assuming the
    existence and validity of the conviction for which the sentence was imposed – the law
    does not authorize that sentence, most typically because it exceeds the most severe
    punishment for which the applicable penal statute provides.” von Thomas v. State,
    
    293 Ga. 569
    , 572 (2) (748 SE2d 446) (2013). “[A] defendant cannot assert a claim
    that his conviction was unlawful in an untimely motion to vacate his sentence simply
    by dressing it up as a claim that his sentence was void.” Garza v. State, 
    325 Ga. App. 505
    , 506 (1) (753 SE2d 651) (2014) (punctuation omitted).
    In his motion to vacate his sentence, Nowill asserted that the date range for the
    sexual acts described in the indictment included a period when the victim was older
    than the statutory maximum age for the crime of child molestation,1 that the State
    could have narrowed that date range, that the trial court improperly allowed the jury
    to consider certain child hearsay testimony, and that he was denied the effective
    assistance of counsel. These arguments all relate to the validity of Nowill’s
    convictions, not his sentence, and therefore are not valid void-sentence claims. See
    von Thomas, 
    293 Ga. at 572
     (2).
    Nowill also argued that the prosecutor tricked the judge into not considering
    a lighter sentence and that there were no aggravating circumstances supporting a
    heavy sentence. While these arguments do relate to Nowill’s sentence, they allege
    merely that is unfairly harsh, not that it is void. Nowill does not claim that his
    sentence exceeded the permissible statutory range for the crimes of which he was
    convicted, nor could he colorably do so.2 In the absence of a valid void-sentence
    1
    In his motion, Nowill argued that the relevant age is 14. However, the law in
    effect at the time of Nowill’s offenses provided that a person committed the offense
    of child molestation by performing certain acts with or in the presence of “any child
    under the age of 16 years.” OCGA § 16-6-4 (a) (1997). In our opinion affirming
    Nowill’s conviction, we noted that the State’s evidence showed that Nowill began
    having sexual intercourse with his daughter when she was 12, later engaged in oral
    sex with her, and was having sex with her multiple times per week by the time she
    was 16. Nowill, 271 Ga. App. at 254.
    2
    Nowill was sentenced to fifteen years each for the aggravated child
    molestation convictions, ten years for child molestation, and five years for incest.
    These sentences fell well within the then-applicable statutory sentencing ranges for
    argument, we lack jurisdiction to consider Nowill’s appeal on that issue. See Frazier,
    302 Ga. App. at 349.
    With respect to Nowill’s motion to correct the grand jury minutes to indicate
    that the indictment was not returned in open court, his stated purpose was to prove
    that his indictment “is therefor[e] null, void and of no effect.” See, e.g., Thompson v.
    State, __ Ga. __ (3) (816 SE2d 646) (2018) (“In Georgia, a grand jury indictment
    must be returned in open court, and the failure to do so is per se injurious to the
    defendant.”). Thus, the crux of Nowill’s motion was a challenge to the validity of his
    convictions. See Jones v. State, 
    290 Ga. App. 490
    , 494 (2) (659 SE2d 875) (2008).
    But “a petition to vacate or modify a judgment of conviction is not an appropriate
    remedy in a criminal case,” and any appeal from an order denying or dismissing such
    a motion must be dismissed. Harper, supra, 286 Ga. at 218 (1) and (2).3
    For these reasons, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.
    Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
    Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________
    09/13/2018
    I certify that the above is a true extract from
    the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
    Witness my signature and the seal of said court
    hereto affixed the day and year last above written.
    , Clerk.
    those crimes. See OCGA § 16-6-4 (d) (1) (1997) (range of ten to thirty years for
    aggravated child molestation); § 16-6-4 (b) (1997) (range of five to twenty years for
    child molestation); § 16-6-22 (b) (1968) (range of one to twenty years for incest).
    3
    Nowill could have challenged his indictment through a motion in arrest of
    judgment, but such motions must be filed within the same term of court in which the
    judgment was entered. See Jones, supra, 290 Ga. App. at 493 (1).
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A19A0261

Filed Date: 9/26/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021