Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
LINSON v. The STATE.
Timothy Linson was convicted of sodomy and aggravated child molestation and given concurrent sentences. Because of arguments raised in his motion for new trial, the court merged the sodomy conviction into the aggravated child molestation conviction and re-sentenced him based on the aggravated child molestation conviction alone. In Linson v. State, 221 Ga.App. 691, 693(3), 472 S.E.2d 690 (1996), we reversed the aggravated child molestation conviction on grounds the jury charge allowed a conviction by an act causing physical injury or by an act of sodomy, even though the indictment alleged only physical injury.
On remand, the State successfully moved the court to reinstate the sodomy conviction and dead-docketed the child molestation charge. The court re-sentenced Linson on the sodomy conviction. Linson argues on appeal that the court did not have the power to reinstate and re-sentence on the sodomy conviction.
On remand, the trial court had the power to “unmerge” the sodomy conviction from the defective aggravated child molestation conviction and to re-sentence on the sodomy conviction alone. The Supreme Court of Georgia has reinstated formerly merged convictions and remanded the case to the trial court for sentencing on those convictions. See, e.g., Briscoe v. State, 263 Ga. 310, 311(2), 431 S.E.2d 375 (1993); Thompson v. State, 263 Ga. 23, 26(2), 426 S.E.2d 895 (1993). We have specifically held that on remand a trial court may reconsider any merger issues and sentence accordingly. Hunter v. State, 228 Ga.App. 846, 847-848, 493 S.E.2d 44 (1997); see Duffey v. State, 222 Ga.App. 802, 804(2), 476 S.E.2d 89 (1996).
The court did not err in reinstating the sodomy conviction and in re-sentencing Linson thereon.
Judgment affirmed.
MILLER, Judge.
BLACKBURN, P.J., and ELLINGTON, J., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. A99A1102.
Decided: August 18, 1999
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)