Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Venticinque and Lair, long-term romantic partners living in Savannah, decided to start a family together in 2018. They selected a sperm donor resembling Lair, with Venticinque to be the biological mother. Lair contributed to fertility treatment costs, participated in events marking the pregnancy, and was involved in the child’s birth and early care. Both women were publicly identified as parents of the child, L.V., in birth announcements and social media posts. However, after L.V.’s birth in July 2021, Venticinque’s behavior changed, and in November 2022, she left Savannah with L.V., ceased contact between Lair and the child, and alleged abuse by Lair.Following this, Lair filed a petition in the Superior Court seeking equitable caregiver status under OCGA § 19-7-3.1. Venticinque opposed the petition and challenged the statute’s constitutionality. The trial court denied Venticinque’s motion to dismiss and held that the statute was constitutional, relying on precedent from Clark v. Wade, 273 Ga. 587 (2001). The trial court found that Lair met the statutory requirements for equitable caregiver status and awarded her joint legal custody, visitation, and ultimately primary physical custody of L.V. after a subsequent bench trial. Venticinque appealed the final order, and the Court of Appeals transferred the case to the Supreme Court of Georgia due to the constitutional questions involved.The Supreme Court of Georgia determined that the trial court had applied the wrong legal standard under OCGA § 19-7-3.1 by placing the burden of proving harm to the child on Venticinque, rather than on Lair, the petitioner. The Supreme Court vacated both the equitable caregiver and custody orders and remanded the case for the trial court to apply the correct statutory standard. The constitutional issues were not addressed, as resolution of the statutory issue was dispositive. View "VENTICINQUE v. LAIR" on Justia Law

The case involved the disappearance of Ann Berry in 1991, whose remains were not discovered until 2011 near the home she shared with her husband, Kevin James Lee. On the night she vanished, Berry was attempting to leave Lee with their children, as heard during a worried phone call to her sister. Lee later moved with the children to Kansas and gave inconsistent explanations for Berry’s absence. Berry was not officially listed as missing until 1997. In 2011, her remains were found and identified, with the cause of death ruled a homicide. Lee was indicted in 2012 for malice murder and concealing a death, with the case placed on the dead docket until his 2018 arrest in California.After his arrest, the case was returned to active status in the Coweta County Superior Court. A jury trial in 2022 resulted in Lee’s conviction for malice murder and concealing the death of another. The trial court sentenced him to life plus twelve months. Following a motion for new trial, the court set aside the conviction for concealing a death due to a statute of limitations issue but denied other grounds for a new trial.On appeal to the Supreme Court of Georgia, Lee challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for malice murder, the admission of certain hearsay evidence, the excusal of a juror, and the effectiveness of his counsel regarding speedy trial claims and plea negotiations. The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the evidence was sufficient for the malice murder conviction, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary and juror decisions, and Lee’s counsel was not constitutionally ineffective. The judgment of conviction for malice murder was affirmed. View "LEE v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

In April 2019, a man and his girlfriend, along with her children, were living in an apartment in DeKalb County, Georgia. After being told to move out by the apartment’s primary resident, the man became angry and assaulted his girlfriend in the presence of her child, inflicting multiple injuries including choking, hitting, and stomping. He later transported her, with the help of his daughter, to another apartment in Fulton County, where further violence occurred. The girlfriend was eventually taken to a hospital and pronounced dead. Medical evidence showed she suffered extensive internal and external injuries, including blunt force trauma and strangulation, which were determined to be the cause of death.A DeKalb County grand jury indicted the man for malice murder and related offenses. At trial in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, the jury found him guilty on all counts. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for malice murder, with the other counts vacated or merged. The defendant filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and then appealed.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for malice murder and to establish venue in DeKalb County, as the fatal injuries were inflicted there. The court also rejected the defendant’s challenges to the constitutionality of the venue statute and related jury instruction, finding no conflict with state or federal constitutional requirements. Finally, the court found the defendant’s arguments regarding the proportionality and constitutionality of his sentence to be factually unsupported or abandoned. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the conviction and sentence. View "TAYLOR v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Richard Merritt, an attorney, was convicted of malice murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime after the death of his mother, Shirley Merritt, in February 2019. Prior to the murder, Merritt had pled guilty to multiple theft-related felonies and was sentenced to prison, but was released on GPS monitoring pending his surrender. On the day he was to report to prison, Merritt met his ex-wife and daughter at a doctor’s appointment, returned to his mother’s house, and later left in her car with both their cell phones. He cut off his GPS monitor and disappeared. Shirley was found dead the next day, having suffered stab wounds and blunt-force trauma. Merritt was apprehended months later living under a false identity in Tennessee. At trial, Merritt claimed two unknown men killed his mother, but the jury rejected this account.The Superior Court of DeKalb County held a jury trial in May 2023, resulting in Merritt’s conviction on all counts. He was sentenced to life without parole for malice murder and a consecutive five years for possession of a knife. Other counts were vacated or merged. Merritt filed a motion for new trial, which was denied after an evidentiary hearing in January 2025.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Merritt’s appeal. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and that Merritt failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel regarding cross-examination, closing argument, or other trial strategies. Claims regarding shackling and an alleged Brady violation were deemed waived. The court found no cumulative error and affirmed the convictions. The Supreme Court of Georgia’s judgment was to affirm Merritt’s convictions. View "MERRITT v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns a shooting that occurred on March 15, 2022, in Griffin, Georgia, resulting in the death of Wildarius Draggs and the assault of Rayshon Goodrum. Surveillance footage showed that Draggs and Goodrum were sitting on a porch when a car containing Isaac Reid, Kinesa Harvey, DeQuivon McMullin, and Cameron Barkley drove by. Later, Reid, McMullin, and Barkley exited the car, walked behind a nearby house, and shortly thereafter, shots were fired at Draggs and Goodrum. Barkley, a co-defendant, testified that Reid fired the shots, motivated by the belief that a rival gang member was present. Physical evidence included shell casings at the scene and a photograph of a gold gun allegedly used in the shooting. Draggs died from his injuries, and Goodrum survived.The Superior Court of Spalding County conducted a joint trial for Reid, Harvey, and McMullin. The jury acquitted Harvey of all charges, found Reid guilty of malice murder and other offenses (but not guilty on one gang-related count), and found McMullin guilty of aggravated battery and felony murder predicated on that battery. Reid was sentenced to life without parole plus consecutive sentences for aggravated assault and a gang violation. Reid filed a motion for new trial, which was denied. He then appealed.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case after it was transferred from the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the evidence was sufficient under federal due process standards to support Reid’s convictions, finding that the jury could reasonably conclude Reid was the shooter based on the surveillance footage, testimony, and corroborating evidence. The Court also found that the statutory requirement for corroboration of accomplice testimony was met. The denial of Reid’s motion for new trial was affirmed, and his convictions were upheld. View "REID v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns the fatal shooting of Michael Riley in his home on June 30, 2013. Police investigation revealed that Riley’s wife, Antoinette Riley, and her daughter, Katrina Ledford, were involved in a plot to kill Riley, with Tarell Momon, who was incarcerated and romantically involved with Ledford, allegedly orchestrating the murder. Cell phone records showed extensive communication between Momon, Ledford, and Antoinette, as well as with two other individuals, Terrance Griswould and Travis Berrian, who were implicated as co-conspirators. The evidence included text messages indicating planning and coordination of the murder, and testimony about Momon’s gang affiliation and prison conduct.A Bulloch County grand jury indicted Momon, Griswould, Ledford, and Antoinette Riley for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Ledford and Antoinette pleaded guilty, while Momon and Griswould were tried together. The jury found Momon guilty of murder but acquitted him of the firearm charge; Griswould was acquitted on all counts. Momon was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. He filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court after several amendments and delays.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Momon’s appeal, in which he argued that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to make certain evidentiary objections and that the cumulative effect of these alleged errors denied him a fair trial. The court held that Momon failed to demonstrate either deficient performance by his counsel or resulting prejudice under the standard set by Strickland v. Washington. The court found that the challenged evidence was either admissible, cumulative, or not prejudicial, and that counsel’s decisions were within the bounds of reasonable trial strategy. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed. View "MOMON v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns a man who lived with his father in Barrow County, Georgia, and was accused of killing a family friend who often stayed at their home. After the friend’s disappearance, the accused made suspicious statements to his father, and the friend’s body was later found in the trunk of his own car, having been shot multiple times. The accused was apprehended after fleeing from law enforcement, and during post-arrest interviews, he admitted to the killing and provided details that were corroborated by physical evidence. At trial, he testified that he shot the victim after a confrontation related to past sexual abuse and introduced evidence about his methamphetamine use and its effects.A Barrow County grand jury indicted the accused on multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, firearm possession during a felony, concealing a death, and methamphetamine possession. After a jury trial in the Superior Court of Barrow County, he was found guilty on all counts. The court sentenced him to life plus eighteen years in prison, with certain counts merging or being vacated as a matter of law. The defendant’s motion for a new trial was denied, and he appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed three main claims: the failure to give a jury instruction on voluntary intoxication, the admission of prior-act evidence under Georgia’s Rule 404(b), and the admission of his post-arrest statements. The Court held that the trial court properly declined the requested intoxication instruction because it misstated the law, any error in admitting the prior-act evidence was harmless given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, and the admission of the defendant’s statements did not violate due process because there was no evidence of police coercion. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the convictions. View "WOSCHULA v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Owners of developed commercial and residential properties in Athens-Clarke County challenged the county’s stormwater utility charge, arguing that it was an unconstitutional tax rather than a fee. The charge, established by county ordinances in 2004, funds stormwater management services required by federal law, with the amount assessed based on impervious surface area and land-use classification. The ordinance exempts certain properties, such as public roads and sidewalks, and offers credits for on-site stormwater management. The funds collected are used for flood prevention, pollution minimization, and compliance with federal regulations.Previously, the Superior Court of Athens-Clarke County granted summary judgment to the county, finding that the stormwater utility charge was a fee, not a tax, and thus not subject to the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision. This decision relied on the Georgia Supreme Court’s earlier ruling in Homewood Village, LLC v. Unified Government of Athens-Clarke County, which had addressed the same ordinance and held it imposed a fee rather than a tax. The appellants also pursued related claims in federal court, but those were dismissed on abstention grounds.On appeal, the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the trial court’s decision. The court held that its prior decision in Homewood Village, LLC v. Unified Government of Athens-Clarke County controlled, reaffirming that the stormwater utility charge is a fee and not a tax, and therefore the uniformity provision does not apply. The court also rejected the appellants’ arguments that the charge constituted an unconstitutional taking under the Georgia and United States Constitutions, finding no basis for such a claim. Finally, the court found that the trial court had properly applied the summary judgment standard and had not improperly resolved factual disputes. The judgment in favor of the county was affirmed. View "HOMEWOOD ASSOCIATES INC. v. UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY" on Justia Law

A group of teenagers, including the appellants, committed a series of armed robberies and a murder over a three-day period in October 2018 in Suwanee, Georgia. The crimes included the shooting death of Willian Tunchez and the robberies of four other individuals. The group, associated with the Gangster Disciples street gang, planned and executed these crimes, often using firearms and dividing the stolen proceeds. Evidence included testimony from accomplices, physical evidence recovered from the defendants’ residences, and digital evidence from cell phones and social media.Following these events, a Gwinnett County grand jury indicted several individuals on multiple counts, including malice murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and violations of the Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act. Some co-defendants agreed to testify for the State. After a joint jury trial in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County, the jury found the appellants guilty on most counts. The trial court sentenced both to life imprisonment without parole for malice murder, with additional concurrent and consecutive sentences for other offenses. The court merged certain counts for sentencing and vacated others by operation of law. Both appellants filed timely motions for new trial, which were denied, and then appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, and alleged sentencing errors. The Court held that there was sufficient direct evidence to support the convictions, that trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective, and that most sentencing decisions were correct. However, the Court found that the trial court erred by failing to merge one aggravated assault count with an armed robbery count for one appellant, vacating that sentence but otherwise affirming the convictions and sentences. View "Evans v. State" on Justia Law

A group of broadband internet providers in Georgia entered into contracts with the Georgia Department of Transportation to install and maintain their equipment along public rights of way. These contracts set annual permit fees and included a clause stating that the contracts would remain in effect until the parties entered into a new agreement. In 2021, the Department amended its rules, increasing permit fees and requiring providers to sign new contracts. The providers refused, and the Department notified them that, absent new agreements, they would be subject to the new rules. The providers then filed suit, seeking a declaratory judgment that their contracts were enforceable, not terminable at will, and that the Department’s actions impaired their contractual rights in violation of the United States and Georgia Constitutions.The Superior Court denied the State’s motion to dismiss, finding that sovereign immunity was waived under Article I, Section II, Paragraph V(b) of the Georgia Constitution because the providers sought declaratory relief from alleged unconstitutional acts. The court granted summary judgment to the providers, holding that the contracts were enforceable and not terminable at will by the Department.On appeal, the Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case. The Court agreed with the lower court that sovereign immunity was waived for this declaratory judgment action, as the providers sought relief from acts allegedly violating constitutional provisions. However, the Supreme Court of Georgia disagreed with the trial court’s interpretation of the contracts. It held that the contracts were of indefinite duration and, under longstanding Georgia law, were terminable at will by either party with notice. The Court affirmed the waiver of sovereign immunity but vacated the judgment granting declaratory and injunctive relief, remanding the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. View "State v. Dovetel Communication, LLC" on Justia Law