Veal v. Georgia

Anthony Veal challenged his convictions for numerous crimes, including malice murder, committed in the course of an armed robbery. He argued the trial court erred in failing to strike for cause potential and actual jurors who knew the murder victim or had a business relationship with the bank where the crimes occurred and that his counsel was ineffective for failing to move to strike the jurors for cause. Veal also argued that his due process rights were violated by the trial court’s failure to rule on his motion for new trial for over 17 years, and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to pursue post-conviction relief in a timely fashion. The Georgia Supreme Court found that Veal did not preserve his argument that the challenged jurors were disqualified from serving as a matter of law, and trial counsel was not ineffective because a motion to strike on the only basis Veal asserted would have been meritless. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed his convictions. View "Veal v. Georgia" on Justia Law