Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellants Ken and Rochel Parker and Appellees Andrew and Penny Leeuwenburg were neighbors with a contentious relationship. Appellees first sought to have Appellants secure a good behavior bond in 2011, but the parties reached an agreement without the issuance of the bond. Appellees again sought a good behavior bond in 2013; the parties agreed to a six-month bond, which was later extended for an additional six months, and that bond expired in December 2014. Appellees sought a second bond in January 2015, alleging that Appellants had: installed security cameras aimed at Appellees’ property; conversed with and “objected to the activities of a tree service hired by [Appellees]”; and used flashlights in a manner that disrupted the sleep of Appellees. Following a hearing a magistrate court issued a bond enjoining both parties from: having direct or indirect contact with the other. Appellants sought review of the bond by way of a petition for certiorari with the superior court. Later, however, Appellees agreed to dismiss the bond, and Appellants agreed to dismiss their appeal; a consent order memorializing the parties’ agreement was filed in June 2016. In that same month, Appellants filed a complaint in the superior court seeking, among other things, a declaration that OCGA 17-6-90 was unconstitutional. The trial court concluded that the statute was constitutional and granted summary judgment to Appellees. On appeal, Appellants continued to assert that OCGA 17-6-90 was unconstitutional. In response, Appellees argued that Appellants lacked standing to bring their challenge. With that contention, the Supreme Court agreed. View "Parker v. Leeuwenberg" on Justia Law

Appellant Corrick Johnson was tried before a jury on charges of malice murder, felony murder (two counts), aggravated assault, and false imprisonment, in the death of Latresh Brown. He appealed, claiming, among other things, that the trial court erred in failing to merge the aggravated assault conviction with the murder conviction and that the court erred in its instructions to the jury. The Supreme Court agreed with Johnson that the failure to merge was error and therefore vacated his conviction for aggravated assault. The Court affirmed in all other respects. View "Johnson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Roy McKinney was convicted of the malice murder of his wife, Shaquilla Weatherspoon, and cruelty to children in the third degree for beating Weatherspoon in the presence of their six-year-old daughter. His only contention on appeal was that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his murder conviction. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "McKinney v. Georgia" on Justia Law

This appeal stemmed from the denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea. Appellant Gilberto Gomez shot and killed 13-year-old Steven Galindo during an armed robbery of Galindo and Galindo’s sister, Samaria Diaz. Gomez and his compatriot Sergio Reyes Alvear approached the victims while they were outside their apartment next to their truck. Gomez was armed with a shotgun and Alvear was armed with a baseball bat. Gomez and Alvear, whose faces were covered by bandanas, invoked the name of a street gang and demanded the keys to the vehicle. They also took money and jewelry from Diaz. When the key the men were given did not start the truck, Alvear began hitting the truck with the bat. Meanwhile, Galindo tried to run away and Gomez shot him at least two times in the back. A Clayton County grand jury indicted Gomez and Alvear on charges of malice murder, four counts of felony murder, two counts of armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, three counts of violating the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act (GSGTPA), two counts of hijacking a motor vehicle, criminal damage to property in the second degree, theft by receiving stolen property, and five counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. Before trial, Gomez learned from plea counsel that Alvear would likely testify against him, and, at that point, Gomez entered a negotiated plea and pled guilty to malice murder, armed robbery (of Diaz), and a violation of the GSGTPA. The trial court sentenced Gomez to life in prison with the possibility of parole for malice murder, 15 years to serve consecutively for armed robbery, and 5 years to serve consecutively for violation of the GSGTPA. The remaining indicted charges were nolle prossed. On appeal, Gomez argued his plea should be allowed to be withdrawn because his plea counsel did not specifically advise him he would have to serve at least 42-45 years in prison before being eligible for parole. As such, Gomez contended his plea counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the motion. View "Gomez v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Brandon Harrington was convicted of the malice murder and armed robbery of Mamie Wright and related crimes. On appeal, he argued the trial court erred in admitting his custodial interviews and that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction for armed robbery. The Supreme Court agreed with the latter contention and reversed Appellant’s armed robbery conviction. The Court also identified a merger error made by the trial court in sentencing Appellant, and therefore vacated the judgment in part and remanded for Appellant to be sentenced for burglary. The Court affirmed in all other respects. View "Harrington v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Marcus Smiley appealed his convictions and sentences for malice murder, aggravated battery, and first degree cruelty to children, all in connection with the death of three-month-old Mia Williams and injuries to seven-month-old Tyre Mears. Smiley challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him. The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented authorized the jury to find Smiley guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the crimes of which he was found guilty. However, the Court found that aggravated battery committed against Mia merged into the malice murder of Mia. Therefore, the conviction and sentence entered on the aggravated battery of Mia had to be vacated. View "Smiley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Derrick Stanley appealed his convictions for malice murder and other crimes related to the stabbing death of Doris Murray. Appellant and Murray were formerly in a romantic relationship. At the time of Murray’s death, she and appellant were still active in each other’s lives. In 2008, appellant was helping Murray remove items from her home which had recently sustained damage from a fire. That morning, Murray’s children and other acquaintances were also scheduled to come to the house to provide assistance. A neighbor heard appellant and Murray “fussing” and saw appellant and Murray go into the house. That was the last time anyone saw Murray alive. The police caught up with appellant in his vehicle but he fled, leading authorities on a high-speed chase. When appellant was finally caught and arrested, police found a knife in his vehicle. Appellant made a statement to police alleging he and Murray had engaged in a struggle over a knife and that she stabbed him. The lead investigator testified that the blood splatter in the carport room confirmed there was some sort of a “mobile struggle” between appellant and the victim, meaning appellant and the victim moved about the room during the incident. Appellant eventually admitted he injured himself with the knife and confirmed he stabbed Murray. Murray had defensive wounds to her body, including a partially-severed thumb. Appellant challenged alleged errors at trial, but finding none, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant’s convictions. View "Stanley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following a jury trial regarding ninety separate counts of criminal activity, Tamario Wise appealed his convictions for murder and armed robbery, contending that the trial court made certain evidentiary errors and that the evidence was insufficient to support one count of armed robbery. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Wise v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Kajul Harvey was convicted of malice murder, burglary and other crimes in connection with the death of her mother, Alena Marble. She appealed, arguing, amongst other things, the evidence of guilt was insufficient and her trial counsel was ineffective. After review, the Supreme Court found no harmful error and affirmed appellant’s convictions and sentences, except for the conviction and sentence for hindering the apprehension of a criminal, which the Court determined should have been vacated. View "Harvey v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 1991, the Georgia Supreme Court declared Bartow County’s zoning ordinance to be invalid. Two years later, Bartow County enacted a new zoning ordinance that, among other things, included a provision addressing vested rights for nonconforming use that were acquired during the absence of a valid zoning ordinance. Twenty-five years later, this case required a determination as to whether that 1993 vested-right provision was unconstitutional as applied to Appellant Southern States-Bartow County, Inc. Though the trial court concluded that the zoning provision in question suffered no constitutional infirmity, the Supreme Court disagreed. Because the zoning provision is unconstitutional as applied to Southern States, the Court reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded for further proceedings. View "Southern States-Bartow County, Inc. v. Riverwood Farm" on Justia Law