Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Articles Posted in Constitutional Law
Favors v. Georgia
Dearies Favors appealed the denial of his motion for new trial after a jury found him guilty of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the October 2012 death of Demarcus Booker. Favors argued the trial court abused its discretion by admitting, over Favors’ objection, a photograph showing Booker after he had been shot because the photograph was unnecessarily graphic and because it did not accurately depict the crime scene. Additionally, Favors argued the trial court abused its discretion by denying Favors’ request to immediately issue a jury charge regarding sympathy when one of the State’s witnesses became emotional during his trial testimony. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Favors' convictions. View "Favors v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Cartwirght v. Caldwell
During his 2007 trial, Derrick Cartwright raised an alibi defense to charges of murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Kevin Stafford. Cartwright was convicted and sentenced to serve life in prison plus five years. On direct appeal, he claimed among other things that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to challenge a police detective's testimony that Cartwright had not mentioned his alibi during his post-arrest police interview. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Cartwright’s convictions, rejecting his claim that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to introduce the testimony, finding Cartwright had not shown prejudice because at the motion for new trial hearing, he failed to call the detective as a witness or introduce a transcript of the detective’s preliminary hearing testimony. Cartwright then filed a petition for habeas corpus, alleging among other things that his appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to introduce evidence to prove trial counsel’s ineffectiveness in failing to impeach the detective. The habeas court denied the petition. The Supreme Court granted Cartwright’s application to appeal for consideration of whether the habeas court erred in ruling that Cartwright had not shown that his appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance. The Supreme Court concluded the habeas court’s ruling was erroneous, and therefore reversed the denial of habeas relief. View "Cartwirght v. Caldwell" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Chambers v. Hall
In 2003, a jury found Willie Chambers guilty of armed robbery, four counts of kidnapping, five counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. He was sentenced to serve 20 years in prison for armed robbery; 20 years for each count of kidnapping, concurrent to each other but consecutive to the armed robbery sentence; 10 years for each count of aggravated assault, concurrent with all the other counts; and five years on probation for firearm possession, consecutive to all the other counts. The Georgia Supreme Court granted Chambers' application for a certificate of probable cause to appeal the denial of his petition for habeas relief to address: (1) whether the habeas court erred in concluding there was sufficient evidence of asportation (of the victim) to support the kidnapping charge; and (2) whether the aggravated assault charge merged into the armed robbery count. The Supreme Court determined the habeas court failed to recognize the merger of the latter counts, and set aside the conviction for aggravated assault. The Court remanded for resentencing, leaving intact the other convictions and sentences. View "Chambers v. Hall" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Overton v. Georgia
Appellant Aaron Overton appealed his convictions related to the shooting death of Steve McQuire. Appellant alleged on appeal the trial court erred when it failed to give charges related to involuntary manslaughter. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Overton v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Park v. Georgia
The Georgia Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal in this case to address Joseph Park's challenge to the constitutionality of OCGA 42-1-14, which required among other things, that a person classified as a sexually dangerous predator, but who is no longer in State custody or on probation or parole, wear and pay for a GPS monitoring device that allows the State to monitor that individual’s location “for the remainder of his or her natural life.” The Court concluded OCGA § 42-1-14 (e), on its face, authorized a patently unreasonable search that ran afoul of the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. As a result, subsection (e) of the statute was stricken as unconstitutional. View "Park v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Fulton County v. City of Atlanta
In December 2017, the City of Atlanta enacted an ordinance to annex certain property that lies within the Fulton County Industrial District. Fulton County filed a lawsuit for declaratory and injunctive relief against the City and several of its officers, asserting that the annexation of property within the District was prohibited by a local constitutional amendment ratified in 1979. In response, the City argued that the 1979 amendment was never constitutionally adopted, that it was repealed in any event by the adoption of the Constitution of 1983, and that local laws purporting to continue the amendment are themselves unconstitutional. The trial court agreed, and it held, among other things, that the 1979 amendment was enacted in violation of the constitutional “single subject” rule. See Ga. Const. of 1976, Art. XII, Sec. I, Par. I. The County appealed, but finding no error in the trial court's judgment, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Fulton County v. City of Atlanta" on Justia Law
Conley v. Pate
Brandon Pate was convicted in 2010 of statutory rape, aggravated assault, and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 20 years for the statutory rape, a consecutive term of probation for 20 years for the aggravated assault, and a consecutive term of probation for five years for the possession of a knife. In 2013, Pate filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging his sentence. The habeas court concluded that his sentence was unlawful in several respects and issued the writ. The Warden appealed. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded after review that Pate’s sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment for statutory rape "does not meet even the threshold inference of gross disproportionality," and so, despite his young age, "his sentence for statutory rape must stand." View "Conley v. Pate" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Tyner v. Georgia
In 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed appellant Curtis Tyner’s 1984 conviction pursuant to a guilty plea for malice murder in connection with the death of Martha Mickel. Following a trial, Tyner was again convicted of malice murder and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, Tyner contended that the trial court erred in allowing certain statements made by Mickel to be admitted at trial under the residual hearsay exception contained in OCGA 24-8-807; that the trial court erred in allowing certain out-of-court statements of investigating officers to be admitted at trial; that the trial court erred in admitting evidence related to the robbery-by-force charge; and that the trial court erred in merging the felony murder count with the malice murder count rather than vacating the felony murder count (the felony murder counts were vacated as a matter of law). Finding the remaining challenges to be without merit, the Supreme Court affirmed Tyner's second conviction. View "Tyner v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
McCord v. Georgia
In 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed appellant Curtis Tyner’s 1984 conviction pursuant to a guilty plea for malice murder in connection with the death of Martha Mickel. Following a trial, Tyner was again convicted of malice murder and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, Tyner contended that the trial court erred in allowing certain statements made by Mickel to be admitted at trial under the residual hearsay exception contained in OCGA 24-8-807; that the trial court erred in allowing certain out-of-court statements of investigating officers to be admitted at trial; that the trial court erred in admitting evidence related to the robbery-by-force charge; and that the trial court erred in merging the felony murder count with the malice murder count rather than vacating the felony murder count (the felony murder counts were vacated as a matter of law). Finding the remaining challenges to be without merit, the Supreme Court affirmed Tyner's second conviction. View "McCord v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Virger v. Georgia
Darius Virger and Alexis Cave were tried together for crimes related to the beating and death of Diarra Chappell, a 13-month-old child who lived with them. Virger was convicted of malice murder, Cave was convicted of felony murder, and both were convicted of other offenses. On appeal, both Virger and Cave challenged the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting some of their convictions and contended the trial court erred by not severing their cases for trial. Virger also contended the trial court erred by failing to strike a juror for cause, by physically separating the co-defendants during their trial, and by overruling several of his evidentiary objections. Cave argued the trial court erred by allowing the admission of impermissible character evidence, by excluding expert testimony about her mental condition, and by denying her motion for a continuance. In its review of the record, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error, so it affirmed the convictions in both cases. View "Virger v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law