Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Articles Posted in Constitutional Law
by
Eddie Clark pleaded guilty to felony murder and other crimes in connection with the stabbing death of Elizabeth Hutcheson. Years later, he filed a motion for out-of-time appeal, which the trial court summarily denied without a hearing. Clark alleged in his motion for out-of-time appeal that his failure to file a timely appeal resulted from his plea counsel’s constitutionally ineffective assistance. If Clark could prove this allegation, he would be entitled to an out-of-time appeal. However, the trial court denied Clark’s motion without conducting a factual inquiry into his claim of ineffective assistance. Accordingly, as the State conceded, under the circumstances presented in this case, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded “for the court to conduct an evidentiary hearing and determine whether plea counsel’s ineffective assistance was responsible for [Clark’s] failure to pursue a timely appeal.” View "Clark v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Lawrence Hughes was convicted by jury of the felony murder of Jamon Epps, and related crimes. On appeal, he contended: (1) the evidence was insufficient; (2) the trial court made certain evidentiary and charging errors; and (3) trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Hughes' convictions. View "Hughes v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Derek Smallwood was convicted after a bench trial for entering an automobile under OCGA 16*8*18. He argued the statute was void for vagueness, or alternatively, under the rule of lenity, he should have been sentenced for misdemeanor criminal trespass of a vehicle. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded OCGA 16-8-18 was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the facts of Smallwood’s case, and because that statute prevailed as the more specific statute over criminal trespass of a vehicle, the rule of lenity did not apply. View "Smallwood v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Tommy Lee Morris was convicted by jury of felony murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in connection with the shooting death of Tony Foster. Morris contended on appeal only that the evidence presented against him at trial was insufficient to support his convictions. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Morris' convictions. View "Morris v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Jerry Merritt appealed his convictions for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony for the 2014 shooting death of Anthony Taylor, following an argument between the two. Merritt contended his trial counsel was ineffective, and that the trial court erred by failing to give jury instructions on voluntary manslaughter and duty to retreat, and by allowing the prosecutor to ask leading questions. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded any deficient performance by counsel did not prejudice Merritt’s case; any error by the trial court in allowing leading questions was harmless; and that the trial court did not plainly err in refusing to give the requested instructions. View "Merritt v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Namon Wilcox challenged his 2016 convictions for rape, malice murder, and other crimes in connection with the rape and subsequent stabbing death of Suzanne Stilwell. Wilcox contended the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions and asked the Georgia Supreme Court to grant him a new trial on general grounds. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Wilcox's convictions. View "Wilcox v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Ronnie Bonner entered a non-negotiated guilty plea to malice murder and other charges in connection with a March 2012 home invasion in Richmond County, Georgia. Bonner later filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, and, following a hearing, the trial court entered an order denying the motion. Bonner appealed, challenging the voluntariness of his plea and claiming that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits of Bonner’s motion to withdraw, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the appealed order and remanded this case to the trial court for dismissal of Bonner’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. View "Bonner v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Clarence Casey was convicted by jury of felony murder predicated on an aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the shooting death of Alfred Bradley. Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Casey appealed, alleging: (1) the State presented insufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict; (2) the trial court did not apply the proper standard in evaluating Casey’s claim for relief on the “general grounds” set forth in OCGA sections 5-5-20 and 5-5-21; and (3) the trial court erred by admitting certain evidence. While the Georgia Supreme Court found was sufficient evidence to support the verdict as a matter of due process, it concluded the trial court failed to exercise its discretion as the “thirteenth juror” under OCGA sections 5-5-20 and 5-5-21 in ruling on Casey's motion for a new trial. The Court therefore vacated the trial court's order in part and remanded the case to the trial court. Necessarily, the Court did not reach Casey's final enumeration of error. View "Casey v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Dylon Allen and Zaykives McCray appealed their convictions for malice murder and other offenses in connection with the shooting death of Chiragkumar Patel. Allen argued on appeal that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of a prior robbery and by allowing McCray’s out-of-court statements to be used against Allen, and that these errors cumulatively prejudiced him. McCray argued the trial court erred by failing to ensure that McCray understood his right to be present at bench conferences and failing to instruct the court reporter to transcribe the entirety of voir dire. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed: (1) Allen’s convictions, because any errors in admitting evidence of a prior robbery and McCray’s out-of-court statements were harmless, even considered cumulatively; and (2) McCray’s convictions, because the record showed McCray elected not to attend bench conferences despite being told that he could, and the trial court was not required to order the court reporter to transcribe voir dire. View "Allen v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
In the parking lot of a gas station, a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) game warden told Christopher Thornton to turn down the volume of his car stereo. Thornton refused to comply, and he eventually drove away, dragging the game warden for a short distance. He later was arrested and charged with several crimes, including two counts of obstructing a game warden in the lawful discharge of his official duties. Thornton was convicted by jury. On appeal, he argued the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions for obstruction because it failed to establish that the game warden was in the lawful discharge of his official duties at the time of the incident. In particular, Thornton argued that a game warden had no authority to enforce the Uniform Rules of the Road, which limited the volume of sound that can be emitted from a stereo in a motor vehicle - in the parking lot of a gas station. The Court of Appeals rejected these arguments and affirmed the judgment of conviction. Although its analysis differed somewhat from that of the Court of Appeals, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded the obstruction convictions could stand. View "Thornton v. Georgia" on Justia Law