Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant Brodrick Williams was convicted of malice murder, armed robbery, and a firearm offense in connection with the shooting death of Daniel McGee. Appellant appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions; and (2) he was deprived of his right to conflict-free counsel. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded: (1) the evidence was legally sufficient to support Appellant’s murder and firearm convictions, but not his armed robbery conviction; and (2) Appellant had not shown his trial counsel had an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected counsel’s representation. The Court therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part, remanding the case for further proceedings. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Matthew Pierce was tried by jury and found guilty on six counts of aggravated child molestation, two counts of child molestation, two counts of sexual battery, and one count each of sexual exploitation of a child, distribution of Hydromorphone, and distribution of Alprazolam. The crimes involved acts with three teenage boys, B.M., M.T., and D.D. Pierce appealed to the Court of Appeals, which transferred the case to the Georgia Supreme Court because it raised an issue of the constitutionality of a statute, an issue over which the Supreme Court had exclusive jurisdiction. In addition to his constitutional claims, Pierce argued the trial court erred in admitting a videotaped interview of B.M. and photographs of text messages from D.D.’s cell phone. Finding no merit to any of Pierce’s claims, the Supreme Court affirmed his convictions. View "Pierce v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Matthew Benton was convicted by jury of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Christopher “Black Magic” Ramsay and the wounding of several others. Benton’s motion for a new trial was denied, and he appealed, primarily arguing the trial court erred when it refused to suppress incriminating statements he made while in police custody. Because the Georgia Supreme Court concluded Benton’s custodial statements were obtained in violation of his Miranda rights (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966)), it reversed the judgment of the trial court. View "Benton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Lewis Parks a/k/a Harris appeals his convictions related to the 2010 death of Lyndon “Pookie” Tucker. Appellant’s sole enumeration of error is that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of the crimes for which the jury returned verdicts of guilty. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient as a matter of due process to authorize a rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted either as a direct participant or as a party to the crimes for which he was charged. View "Parks v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Nehemiah Anglin appealed his conviction for felony murder and marijuana possession following the death of Damion Wright. Anglin argued the trial court erred by admitting: (1) testimony that he put a “hit” on the State’s primary witness; (2) evidence of his alleged membership in a gang, including evidence of his tattoos; (3) other evidence he says is hearsay; (4) security camera footage; and (5) testimony concerning the credibility of a witness. He also argued that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to certain jury charges and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court found the evidentiary decisions of which Anglin complained either did not amount to an abuse of the trial court’s discretion or were harmless error. The Court also found Anglin’s claims of deficient performance by counsel were either without merit or abandoned, and the Court rejected an argument that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions. View "Anglin v. Georgia" on Justia Law

A grand jury indicted appellant Juan Cannon for crimes relating to victim Terrence Wiggins being stabbed in the neck because appellant believed Wiggins owed him money. The record showed the stabbing took place in a DeKalb County restaurant. Anthony Daniels, who was closing up the restaurant, witnessed the stabbing. Shaquanna Fields, who was sitting inside the restaurant, was also alleged to have witnessed the events of that night. Immediately after being stabbed, the victim ran away from appellant and ran towards a police officer who was conducting a traffic stop across the street from the restaurant. Wiggins ran from the restaurant, and flagged down a police officer. The officer asked Wiggins who stabbed him, but Wiggins was running out of breath and was unable to answer. Wiggins eventually died from the injury he sustained to his neck. Appellant represented himself for the first day and a half of trial. On the second day of trial, during his cross-examination of Daniels, who was the fourth witness for the State, appellant decided he wanted to be represented by the public defender who had been standing by to represent him if requested. Trial counsel took over the cross-examination of Daniels and continued to represent appellant for the remainder of the trial. After he was convicted, appellant argued: (1) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel; (3) the trial court erred by not giving a requested jury charge on impeachment by prior conviction (pertaining to Daniels’ testimony); and (4) the trial court abused its discretion when it gave the “Allen” charge after a juror stated his unwillingness to continue listening and discussing the case with the other jurors. The Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed appellant’s convictions. View "Cannon v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following a bench trial, appellant William Wimberly was found guilty of felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, in the 2014 death of Christopher Strickland. He appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence was insufficient; (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; and (3) that he was entitled to a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. Finding these assertions were without merit, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Wimberly v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Wardell White entered guilty pleas to felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting deaths of Victor Martinez and Mauricio Maldonado, and the trial court entered judgments of conviction and sentence on the guilty pleas that did not merge. During the same term of court, Appellant filed two pro se motions to withdraw guilty pleas. The State moved to dismiss the pro se motions on the ground that Appellant was represented by counsel when he filed them, and the trial court granted the State’s motion. Appellant, assisted by counsel, filed a timely notice of appeal. However, finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "White v. Georgia" on Justia Law

This case arose from “a long-running battle” that appellant Richard Shelley waged against the Town of Tyrone’s zoning ordinances. Because Shelley failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking relief in the trial court, his as-applied challenges to the zoning ordinances were not ripe for judicial review. The Georgia Supreme Court therefore affirmed the superior court’s order granting Tyrone partial summary judgment on those claims. And because the town enacted a new zoning ordinance, Shelley’s facial challenges to the previous ordinances were moot. The Supreme Court therefore vacated the superior court’s order addressing the merits of those claims and remanded the case with direction to dismiss those claims unless Shelley properly amended his complaint to challenge the ordinance now in effect. View "Shelly v. Town of Tyrone" on Justia Law

Stephen Fazio was convicted after a bench trial of driving under the influence of alcohol to the extent it was less safe to do so, and driving with an unlawful blood alcohol concentration. He appealed, arguing the trial court erred when it refused to suppress the results of his alcohol breath tests because, he contended, they were obtained in violation of the United States and Georgia constitutions, in part because the statute did not fully and accurately inform a suspect of his rights or the consequences of his refusal to consent to a breath test. Finding no error or constitutional violation, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Fazio v. Georgia" on Justia Law