Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Varocus Grant appealed his convictions for malice murder and firearm possession during the commission of a felony in relation to the 2011 shooting death of Travis Shivers. Grant argued he was denied a fair trial because the jury array was selected in a manner inconsistent with the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U. S. Constitution and Georgia statutory law, that the trial court erred by denying a motion in limine to exclude an incriminating statement by Grant, that the trial court erred by admitting testimony about fingerprint evidence, and that his trial counsel was ineffective for numerous reasons. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Grant v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Jimmy Riley was convicted for the 1986 murder of Pauline McCoy, in addition for burglary and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. He appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for a new trial, arguing the trial court should have allowed certain expert testimony and that the trial court erroneously found that the “person unknown” exception tolled the statute of limitation on his non-murder charges under OCGA 17-3-2 (2). Because the Georgia Supreme Court determined the trial court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing expert testimony, it affirmed Riley’s murder conviction. However, the Court vacated the trial court’s judgment with respect to Riley’s convictions for burglary and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony and remanded the case for the trial court to consider, under the facts of this case, when the State had sufficient information to establish actual knowledge of Riley as the “person committing th[ose] crime[s],” thus ending the tolling of the statute of limitation. View "Riley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Tito Ivey appealed his convictions for felony murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the 2015 shooting of Franklin Jones. On appeal, Ivey challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions and raises four claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Taking each challenge under consideration, the Georgia Supreme Court found no merit to Ivey’s claims and affirmed his convictions. View "Ivey v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The State appealed a trial court’s judgment of conviction and sentence imposed on Tina Marie Hanna after her plea of guilty to felony murder and related crimes, contending that the sentence was illegal and void because the trial court improperly sentenced Hanna on the basis of the “rule of lenity.” The Georgia Supreme Court determined the rule of lenity was not implicated in this case, because the trial court erred in sentencing Hanna for an offense which was not charged and to which she did not plead guilty. The Court therefore vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings and resentencing. View "Georgia v. Hanna" on Justia Law

Preston Young was tried by jury and convicted of murder and aggravated assault in connection with the death of his estranged wife, Sharon Sylvester. Young argued on appeal the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions, that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, and that the trial court erred in several ways, including in its evidentiary rulings and its jury charge. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no merit in these claims of error, and affirmed Young's convictions. View "Young v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2004, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Stanley Hollmon's conviction for malice murder, and held his convictions for criminal attempt to commit armed robbery and felony murder had been vacated. More than a decade later, the trial court entered a sentence on the vacated criminal attempt count. Following that resentencing, in March 2018, Hollmon filed a motion for new trial seeking to raise claims that the indictment was defective and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the issue. Without specifying whether it was denying or dismissing that motion, the trial court applied the Supreme Court's holding in Walker-Madden v. Georgia, 804 SE2d 8 (2017), and ruled that Hollmon could not assert the claims because he should have raised them in his first appeal. Hollmon challenged that ruling. Because the trial court’s resentencing was a nullity, Hollmon was not permitted a motion for new trial from the resentencing. The Supreme Court construed the trial court’s ruling as a dismissal of Hollmon’s motion and affirmed. The Court vacated the trial court's sentencing order for want of jurisdiction. View "Hollmon v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Jarmond Curry was convicted by jury of felony murder, voluntary manslaughter, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime in connection with the shooting death of Byleem Moore and the armed robbery of Terry Dorsey. On appeal, Curry argued the trial court erred in denying his objection to the identification testimony of two witnesses and his motion for a mistrial based on the State’s failure to disclose that it showed at least one photograph of Curry to the witnesses and they identified Curry as the man they saw fleeing the scene of the crime. Though the Georgia Supreme Court concluded Curry was erroneously sentenced, it otherwise affirmed. View "Curry v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Zion Wainwright and co-defendant Qutravius Palmer were convicted of murder and other crimes in connection with the December 2013 shooting death of Xavier Arnold. On appeal, Wainwright contended the trial court erred in denying a requested continuance for his lead counsel to be present for the beginning of the State’s direct examination of a key witness, and that his lead trial counsel was ineffective in cross-examining that witness. Wainwright also argued the trial court erred by refusing to allow voir dire of the jurors in panels of twelve and by refusing requests to instruct the jury on accident, justification, and voluntary manslaughter. Upon its review of the record, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded the aggravated assault that Wainwright was sentenced for should have been merged, and so it vacated that conviction and sentence. Finding no other reversible error, the Court otherwise affirmed the judgment of the trial court. View "Wainwright v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Gabriel Flannigan appealed his convictions for malice murder and other crimes stemming from the 2007 shooting death of Quantavious Ragsdale. He argued he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel, contending counsel erred in admitting irrelevant and prejudicial evidence. Finding no merit to these claims, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Flannigan's convictions. View "Flannigan v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Mark Birdow appealed his convictions for malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2010 death of Angela Woods. He argued to the Georgia Supreme Court: (1) the State failed to produce sufficient evidence at trial to overcome his claim of self-defense; (2) the trial court erred by excluding the testimony of an expert psychologist Birdow planned to call to testify about his behavior following Woods’ death; (3) the trial court failed to provide him with appropriate technology that would have allowed him to hear the trial proceedings; and (4) his trial counsel was ineffective in several regards. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Birdow's convictions. View "Birdow v. Georgia" on Justia Law