Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Articles Posted in Constitutional Law
Georgia v. Pauldo
Raekwon Pauldo was convicted by jury on one count of malice murder, one count of felony murder, and three counts of aggravated assault in connection with the death of Jaquel Smith. The trial court granted Pauldo’s motion in limine to exclude the portions of his custodial interview with police after he invoked his rights to remain silent and to counsel on the ground that police failed to honor Pauldo’s invocation of those rights by continuing to interrogate him. The State appealed that ruling. After its review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded police did not continue the interrogation, that Pauldo reinitiated a conversation with police about the case, and that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his rights before further interrogation began. Therefore, the Court reversed the trial court's suppression order. View "Georgia v. Pauldo" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Redding v. Georgia
Merrick Redding was tried by jury and convicted of murder and aggravated assault in connection with the death of Joseph Davis. Redding appealed arguing: (1) the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial; and (3) that certain evidence was admitted erroneously at trial. Although the Georgia Supreme Court concluded the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions, the trial court failed to apply the proper standard to the claim that Redding was denied his right to a speedy trial. For that reason, the Court vacated the judgment below and remanded for the trial court to resolve that claim under the proper standard. The Court declined at this point to address the remaining claims of error. View "Redding v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Mathis v. Georgia
Nathaniel Mathis was found guilty of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2016 shooting death of Rodney Benton. Mathis appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence as to each offense of which he was convicted, and contending that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because counsel: (1) did not file a pretrial motion for immunity from prosecution under OCGA 16-3-24.2; and (2) did not call Mathis’ nephew and mother as witnesses at an immunity motion hearing and at trial. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Mathis v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Glover v. Georgia
Appellant DeAndre Glover was convicted of malice murder and making a false statement in connection with the 2015 shooting death of Mario Williams. The trial court denied his motion for a new trial and Glover appealed, arguing he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to object to the admission of hearsay testimony. Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Glover v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Scott v. Georgia
Torrey Sicarr Nigel Scott was tried by jury and convicted of murder, four rapes, and various other offenses in connection with a violent crime spree in the Savannah area in late 2013 and early 2014. Scott appealed, claiming: (1) the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain several of his convictions; (2) the trial court erroneously admitted hearsay evidence; and (3) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed that the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain one of his rape convictions, and reversed that conviction. The Court affirmed in all other respects. View "Scott v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Heard v. Georgia
Appellant Damien Heard was convicted as a party to malice murder and other crimes in connection with the fatal shooting of James Daniel Evers, the armed robbery of Donald Evers, and the aggravated assaults of Charles Emmons and John Elledge, Jr. On appeal, Heard argued that, among other things, the trial court erred by admitting under OCGA 24-4- 404 (b) evidence of subsequent crimes committed by Appellant. The Georgia Supreme Court determined that because the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the evidence of Appellant’s later crimes and the error was not harmless, Appellant’s convictions were reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings. View "Heard v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Crowder v. Georgia
This case stemmed from an October 2016 incident at the Atlanta airport during which law enforcement officers seized $46,820 in cash from Shara Cumins, James Crowder’s daughter. In the ensuing in rem forfeiture proceeding, the trial court awarded Crowder the property. The Court of Appeals, however, reversed. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari review to address : (1) in an in rem forfeiture, whether the forfeiture complaint could be served by publication in the first instance when an interest holder resides out of state; and (2) whether a trial court had to rule on a pending motion for a more definite statement before striking a claimant's answer as insufficient. As to the first question, the Supreme Court concluded the Court of Appeals properly interpreted OCGA 9-16-12 (b) (3) as permitting service by publication in an in rem forfeiture proceeding if the owner of the subject property resided outside of Georgia, and properly rejected Crowder’s claims that personal service was required and that the State’s complaint should have been dismissed based on its failure to personally serve him. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court held the Court of Appeals had to remand the case to the trial court for it to address Crowder’s claim that the State’s service by publication did not satisfy due process. As for the second question, the Supreme Court concluded OCGA 9-16-12 (c) (2) required a trial court to first rule on a motion for a more definite statement before dismissing a claimant’s answer. Because the Court of Appeals implicitly answered this question in the negative, that portion of the Court of Appeals’s judgment was reversed. View "Crowder v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law
Dixon v. Georgia
Stanley Dixon was convicted by jury of malice murder for the shooting death of Cedrick Clark. He was also convicted of aggravated assault, possession of a handgun by an underaged person, and multiple counts of participating in criminal gang activity. On appeal, Dixon contended the evidence was insufficient as to all counts of participating in criminal gang activity and that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial. In addition, he contended the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the offense of participating in criminal gang activity and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Dixon's convictions. View "Dixon v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Lyons v. Georgia
Joseph Lyons was convicted by jury for the felony murder of Tony Lyons, two counts of aggravated assault, one count of home invasion, and two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. On appeal, Lyons argued the trial court made numerous errors by: (1) allowing certain state exhibits to go to the jury during deliberations in violation of the continuing witness rule; (2) improperly instructing the jury on aggravated assault; (3) permitting the State to elicit hearsay testimony; (4) admitting photographs of Lyons in possession of a gun; (5) sentencing Lyons on the aggravated assault counts; and (6) admitting gang-related evidence. Lyons also argued he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial because: (1) trial counsel failed to object to certain witness statements; and (2) trial counsel failed to object to the admission of inadmissible hearsay statements. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed that the trial court erred in sentencing Lyons for the aggravated assault of Tony Lyons (Count 7), and accordingly vacated that sentence. However, with respect to Lyons’ remaining assertions, the trial court’s judgment was affirmed. View "Lyons v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Norris v. Georgia
Melissa Norris was convicted by jury of malice murder and a related firearm offense in connection with the shooting death of her father, Charles. Norris and her father had a strained relationship based on Norris’s refusal to follow her parents’ rules. In late 1995, Norris, then fifteen years old, told a friend she had been arguing with her father. Sometime after the call, Norris took a gun from her brother's room, walked down stairs to where her father was sitting, pointed a gun to the back of his head and pulled the trigger. Norris called her friend again, wherein she admitted to shooting her father. The pair did not call for help or notify law enforcement; instead, they met up and walked down the street to the friend's aunt’s house for dinner. The aunt noticed that the girls were acting “giggly” and whispering back and forth throughout dinner. After providing numerous conflicting stories to law enforcement, including telling officers that her brother had shot the victim and that she was not at home when the shooting occurred, Norris eventually admitted that she shot her father in the back of the head. She testified at trial she did not know whether the gun was loaded, and that she was "just being stupid, horsing around" when the gun went off. On appeal of her conviction, Norris argued the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on mistake of fact. Finding no such error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed her conviction. View "Norris v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law