Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Articles Posted in Constitutional Law
by
Appellant Patrick Butler challenged his 2011 convictions for malice murder and two firearms offenses in connection with the shooting death of Darryl Walden. Appellant argued on appeal: (1) that the evidence presented at trial was legally insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court made several evidentiary errors, and (3) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court determined the evidence presented at trial was legally sufficient to support his convictions. However, the trial court applied the wrong standard in admitting evidence of Appellant’s 2005 felony conviction for obstructing a law enforcement officer during the first stage of the bifurcated trial, and the Supreme Court could not say that the admission of the evidence was harmless. Accordingly, the Court vacated Appellant’s convictions, and remanded the case to the trial court to apply the correct standard and determine whether the prior felony conviction should have been admitted. The Court did not address Appellant’s other enumerations of error at this time. View "Butler v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
In 2009, Appellant Richard “Paul” Harrison was tried on charges of murder and felony murder in connection with the shooting death of Dewey Johnson, but the trial ended in a mistrial when the jury was unable to reach a verdict. Appellant was retried in 2011 before another jury and found guilty of murder and felony murder. He was sentenced to life in prison; his amended motion for new trial was denied, and he appealed. Appellant asserted five enumerations of error: four claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and a merger error in sentencing. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence on the malice murder count. The felony murder conviction and sentence the trial court erroneously imposed and then purported to “merge” with the malice murder conviction were vacated as a matter of law. View "Harrison v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
James Robinson was convicted by jury of the felony murder of four-year-old Lalia Hawthorne and of other crimes committed against Lalia and her younger sister, N. H. Lalia was found unresponsive at her home. Taken to the hospital, doctors initially suspected that Lalia had been infected with meningococcemia. The medical examiner, who found extensive bruising on Lalia’s body, determined that the actual cause of her death was blunt force injury to the abdomen. At trial, the medical examiner testified that internal lacerations can cause a child to appear ill and lethargic and can lead to nausea, vomiting, and a fatal loss in blood pressure. On appeal, Robinson contended the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. He also argued the trial court erred in admitting evidence that he committed a prior act of violence upon Summer Sanchez, his then-girlfriend and the mother of the two victims, and by allowing an expert witness to testify to an ultimate issue in the case. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated Robinson’s conviction for Count 9, one of his convictions for cruelty to children in the first degree upon N. H., to correct a sentencing error, but the Court otherwise affirmed. View "Robinson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Appellant Jennifer Long was convicted of malice murder and first-degree child cruelty in connection with the death of her 18- month-old daughter, Alexis. After they could not conceive a child, Appellant and her husband, Timothy Long, worked with the Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) to adopt a child. Alexis was born in June 2010, and came to live with the Longs in Columbus around June 2011, after her biological mother died and her biological father surrendered his parental rights. Between June and November, DFCS case managers visited the Longs’ home about every two weeks to check on Alexis, and the Longs took her for regular checkups by her pediatrician. The Longs adopted Alexis in November 2011. After that, DFCS stopped its visits, and the Longs missed Alexis’s scheduled 90-day pediatrician checkup in January 2012. One day after church, Alexis ate and played around the church. On the way home, Alexis became a little fussy. When they got home and Appellant took Alexis out of her car seat, Alexis had a tantrum, and Appellant took the child into the house to change her diaper. While he was at the car, Timothy heard a loud noise that sounded like furniture being moved; the noise seemed to come from the direction of Alexis’s room. Alexis was lying on the floor of her room, and it looked like she had vomit in her mouth. She was taken to the hospital and pronounced brain dead the next day, having suffered from blunt force trauma. On appeal, Appellant contended the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions and that her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Appellant's convictions. View "Long v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Vraimone Parker appealed his convictions for malice murder and other offenses, following the shooting death of his aunt’s boyfriend, Kwame Chubbs, and the non-fatal shooting of his aunt, Eva Robinson. At trial, the jury rejected Parker’s defense that he was not guilty by reason of insanity and also rejected the option of finding him guilty but mentally ill. Parker argued on appeal that: (1) the trial court erred by failing to grant a mistrial after a detective commented on Parker’s silence; (2) failing to grant a mistrial after the trial court’s own expert witness testified that Parker knew what he was doing at the time of the shooting; and (3) imposing a discovery sanction that precluded Parker’s expert witness from offering particular testimony. He also argued his trial counsel was ineffective in handling issues related to Parker’s status as a convicted felon. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for mistrial; Parker did not show harmful error as a result of the discovery sanction; and Parker did not demonstrate that he was prejudiced by any deficient performance of counsel, even where counsel’s performance was considered along with the effect of the discovery sanction. View "Parker v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
In this case's previous trip before the Georgia Supreme Court, Dijon Abbott was indicted for the murder of Marques Eubanks and the assaults of Latrice Nelson and Jeremy Whitehead; the Supreme Court affirmed the suppression of custodial statements Abbott made before being given Miranda warnings. In that case, the Supreme Court clarified the legal standard for evaluating post-Miranda statements made after law enforcement used a “two-step interrogation technique”; and remanded the case for the trial court to apply that legal standard to Abbott’s post-Miranda statements. On remand, the trial court again suppressed the entirety of Abbott’s statements, concluding that Abbott had not knowingly and voluntarily waived his rights under Miranda. The State again appealed. Here, the Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s second suppression order and again remanded the case, holding that the trial court failed to adhere to the Supreme Court's remand instructions, which explicitly directed the trial court to determine the admissibility of Abbott’s post-Miranda statements under Justice Kennedy’s concurrence in Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004), which was adopted in Georgia in Norwood v. Georgia, 810 SE2d 554 (2018) (the “Seibert/Norwood standard”). On remand, the trial court was re-directed to apply the Seibert/Norwood legal standard for the limited purpose of determining the admissibility of Abbott’s post-Miranda statements. View "Georgia v. Abbott" on Justia Law

by
Terry Marshall appealed his convictions for the malice murder of Marshal Tucker, the attempted murder of Latonia Patterson, and other related crimes. Marshall contended on appeal that: (1) the trial court improperly sentenced him as a three-time recidivist; (2) the trial court plainly erred by relying on two of his out-of-state convictions in sentencing him as a recidivist; and (3) the trial court committed two merger errors at sentencing. Because the Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the trial court committed several merger errors, it vacated Marshall’s conviction for aggravated assault of one victim. Otherwise, the Court affirmed his convictions. View "Marshall v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Jesus Perez was convicted by jury of malice murder, armed robbery, and concealing the death of another in connection with the bludgeoning death of Boydrick Powell. On appeal, he contended the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial, and that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. Perez also contended the trial court erred in admitting into evidence his custodial statement and the pre-autopsy photographs of Powell’s injuries and in allowing the prosecutor to discuss the law of conspiracy during closing argument. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Perez v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Marquis Studivant was tried by jury and convicted of murder and other crimes in connection with the fatal shooting of Dennis Gayton. Studivant appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress evidence that was collected from a vehicle he was driving around the time of his arrest; and (3) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed. View "Studivant v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Appellant Kevin Reeves challenged his convictions for the malice murder of Marquis Stephens and numerous other crimes, all committed in connection with a gunfight at a house party in 2015. His motion for a new trial was denied. On appeal, Reeves argued the trial court violated his Georgia constitutional right to be present by excluding him from several bench conferences and, relatedly, that trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective by failing to object to Reeves’s exclusion from the bench conferences. Although the Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the trial court erred in failing to merge six of the counts of aggravated assault of which Reeves was convicted with six of the counts of attempted armed robbery, it otherwise affirmed Reeves’s convictions. View "Reeves v. Georgia" on Justia Law