Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Lowe Payne appealed his convictions for felony murder and other crimes arising out of the 2017 shooting death of Carldrake Finister. On appeal, Payne argued the trial court erred when it admitted evidence of prior difficulties between the parties, and that trial counsel was deficient for failing to admit a key piece of exculpatory evidence and for failing to request the trial court to reopen the evidence at the jury’s request. After review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court found not reversible error and affirmed Payne's convictions. View "Payne v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Timothy Ward, the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Corrections, appealed the grant of habeas relief to petitioner Lewis Carlton on the ground that the trial court lacked authority to revoke Carlton’s probation arising from his 2012 convictions by guilty pleas before the probationary period of the criminal sentences began. The Commissioner argued the trial court was authorized by statute and precedent to revoke Carlton’s probation before it began. Carlton responded that the habeas court was correct in granting relief because the trial court lacked such authority. He also claimed the trial court’s actions rendered his guilty pleas unknowing and invalid because he would not have entered the pleas had he known that his probation could be revoked before the probationary period began – claims that the habeas court ruled that the trial court should have addressed in the first instance in the context of a motion for out-of-time appeal. After its review, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded the habeas court erred both in ruling that the trial court could not revoke Carlton’s probation, and in not ruling on Carlton’s invalid-plea claims as well as other claims he asserted. The Court therefore reversed the habeas court’s judgment in part and remanded the case for further consideration. View "Ward v. Carlton" on Justia Law

Odeirrek Boone pleaded guilty to malice murder and other offenses and appeals the denial of his motion for an out-of-time appeal. Boone, proceeding pro se, briefly referenced his plea counsel’s failure to consult with him regarding his right to appeal, but the bulk of his argument was that plea counsel failed to advise him of his right to withdraw his guilty plea prior to sentencing and, had he been so advised, he would have withdrawn his guilty plea. And in attacking on appeal the court’s denial of the motion for out-of-time appeal, before the Georgia Supreme Court, Boone sought only an opportunity to move to withdraw his guilty plea. The Court found "a belated motion to withdraw his guilty plea is not a remedy to which Boone would be entitled even if the court below had granted his motion for out-of-time appeal." It therefore affirmed the denial of relief. View "Boone v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari in this case to address whether defendant's convictions for theft by taking merged under the correct unit-of-prosecution analysis. Because the Court of Appeals applied the wrong legal analysis in evaluating whether Johnson’s theft-by-taking convictions should have merged, the Supreme Court vacated the lower court's holding on that issue and remanded with direction to apply the correct analysis. View "Johnson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the scope of Article I, Section I, Paragraph XVI of the Georgia Constitution of 1983 (“Paragraph XVI”) extended to another test sometimes administered in driving-under-the-influence cases, namely, a chemical test of urine. Under the reasoning of Olevik v. Georgia, 806 SE2d 505 (2017) and Elliott v. Georgia, 824 SE2d 265 (2019), the Supreme Court held that the right against compelled self-incrimination protected by Paragraph XVI prohibited the State from admitting into evidence a defendant’s refusal to urinate into a collection container as directed by the State for purposes of providing a urine sample for chemical testing. View "Award v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Chandler Saxton was convicted of malice murder and a firearm offense in connection with the 2014 shooting death of John Jones. In his sole enumeration of error, he contended the trial court erred by allowing the State’s lead investigator to testify about the direction in which one of the bullets that struck Jones traveled. Assuming without deciding that this testimony was erroneously admitted, the Georgia Supreme Court determined it was harmless, so it affirmed the trial court. View "Saxton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Larry Bates was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of his neighbor, Paul Wilson, and Wilson’s dog. Appellant began accusing his across-the-street neighbors, Paul and Beth Wilson, of allowing their dogs, Scooter and Maggie, to urinate and defecate on his lawn. In May 2017, Appellant made numerous calls to 911 and code enforcement authorities regarding the Wilsons’ dogs and also to report “harassment” from the Wilsons in the form of staring and gesturing at Appellant. Officers responding to the 911 and code enforcement calls found no evidence of defecation by the dogs, and the Wilsons denied harassing Appellant and allowing their dogs to urinate or defecate on the lawn. On May 29, in the presence of a responding officer and another neighbor, Appellant and Wilson shook hands and agreed to let “bygones be bygones.” A month later, Wilson arrived home from work and took the dogs out for their nightly walk. Appellant saw Wilson and his dogs outside Appellant’s home. Shortly thereafter, Appellant called 911 and requested an officer to respond to his address because he was “fixing to shoot this son of a b**ch” for “letting his dog piss in [unintelligible] yard.” While on the phone with the 911 operator, Appellant fired numerous shots at Wilson, killing both him and Scooter. On appeal, Appellant claimed four instances of error, all alleging ineffective assistance of counsel: (1) trial counsel pursued meritless defenses; (2) trial counsel failed to file the necessary pre-trial notice to pursue a mental illness defense; (3) trial counsel failed to properly subpoena an expert witness; and (4) trial counsel failed to object to and rebut the State’s expert witness. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Bates v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Maureen Floyd sought permission to file an information in the nature of quo warranto against appellee Superior Court Judge Jesse Stone of the Augusta Judicial Circuit, with the goal of having him removed from office. Relying on Paragraph VIII (a) of Article V, Section II of the Georgia Constitution, Floyd contended Judge Stone’s appointment was illegal, because the Governor did not “promptly” appoint him to fill the vacancy on the superior court created by the accepted resignation of his predecessor, Judge Michael Annis. The trial court granted Judge Stone’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in quo warranto and denied Floyd leave to file an information against Judge Stone, in part because Floyd failed to show that removal from office through a proceeding in quo warranto was the proper remedy for an appointment that was not made promptly. Finding no error in that judgment, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment on that basis. View "Floyd v. Stone" on Justia Law

Corey Myers was convicted by jury of felony murder and related charges in the shooting death of Emanuel “Seymour” Jones and of burglary and trespass in a separate incident. On appeal, Myers contended that “[t]he verdict is contrary to the principles of justice and equity and against the weight and sufficiency of the evidence” and that the prosecutor improperly argued that a shell casing found near the victim’s body was not relevant to the circumstances of the shooting. He also contended that his decision to plead not guilty was not knowing and voluntary because, contrary to the State’s representation before trial, he was not actually facing a potential mandatory life without parole sentence if he went to trial. After review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed Myers' conviction. View "Myers v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Daniel Taylor was convicted by jury of malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the shooting death of his father, Richard. The trial court denied Taylor’s motion for new trial, and he appealed, contending only that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of statutory law because it was entirely circumstantial and the State failed to exclude every reasonable hypothesis other than his guilt. Because the Georgia Supreme Court found the evidence was sufficient as a matter of statutory law, it affirmed Taylor's conviction. View "Taylor v. Georgia" on Justia Law