Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Jody Greathouse was on probation when he was alleged to have violated its terms by leaving an inpatient drug treatment program before completion. He entered into a Consent Order that revoked his probation but suspended the remainder of his sentence on the condition that he successfully complete the program. The Consent Order included a provision in which Greathouse prospectively waived his right to a probation revocation hearing for any future violations related to the treatment program.After Greathouse left the treatment facility, a community supervision officer submitted an affidavit to the trial court, which then issued an arrest order for Greathouse to serve the remainder of his sentence. Greathouse moved to vacate the arrest order and modify the sentence, arguing that he had entered into the Consent Order without counsel and that the waiver of a future hearing was invalid. At a hearing on the motion, the State did not present evidence of the alleged violation, and the trial court denied Greathouse’s motion.The Court of Appeals of Georgia vacated the trial court’s order, holding that under OCGA § 42-8-34.1(b), a court may not revoke probation unless the defendant admits the violation or a hearing is held at which the violation is established by a preponderance of the evidence. The appellate court found that the statute does not allow for a prospective waiver of the right to a future revocation hearing.The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. The Court held that OCGA § 42-8-34.1(b) limits a trial court’s authority to revoke probation to two circumstances: the probationer admits the violation, or a hearing is held and the violation is proven. A defendant’s purported waiver of a future hearing does not relieve the court of its statutory obligation to hold such a hearing if there is no admission. View "THE STATE v. GREATHOUSE" on Justia Law

In April 2019, a man and his girlfriend, along with her children, were living in an apartment in DeKalb County, Georgia. After being told to move out by the apartment’s primary resident, the man became angry and assaulted his girlfriend in the presence of her child, inflicting multiple injuries including choking, hitting, and stomping. He later transported her, with the help of his daughter, to another apartment in Fulton County, where further violence occurred. The girlfriend was eventually taken to a hospital and pronounced dead. Medical evidence showed she suffered extensive internal and external injuries, including blunt force trauma and strangulation, which were determined to be the cause of death.A DeKalb County grand jury indicted the man for malice murder and related offenses. At trial in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, the jury found him guilty on all counts. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole for malice murder, with the other counts vacated or merged. The defendant filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and then appealed.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for malice murder and to establish venue in DeKalb County, as the fatal injuries were inflicted there. The court also rejected the defendant’s challenges to the constitutionality of the venue statute and related jury instruction, finding no conflict with state or federal constitutional requirements. Finally, the court found the defendant’s arguments regarding the proportionality and constitutionality of his sentence to be factually unsupported or abandoned. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the conviction and sentence. View "TAYLOR v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

On June 1, 2017, Travis Ridley was fatally shot in a breezeway at an apartment complex in DeKalb County, Georgia. The State alleged that Ridley had planned to purchase a large quantity of marijuana from Abel Asmelash and Edward Tavarez, but that Asmelash and Tavarez intended to rob him. During the incident, Tavarez shot Ridley while Asmelash took a bag of money from Ridley’s girlfriend, Erica Shavers, who was the State’s primary eyewitness. The prosecution presented surveillance video, cell-phone records, and Shavers’s testimony to support its case. Asmelash’s defense was that he was not present at the scene and offered an alibi, but did not call his listed alibi witnesses at trial.A DeKalb County grand jury indicted Asmelash, Tavarez, and Jeanmarie Gonzalez. Gonzalez’s case was severed, and Tavarez was tried and convicted in January 2019; his convictions were affirmed by the Supreme Court of Georgia in Tavarez v. State, 319 Ga. 480 (2024). Asmelash’s case was severed during Tavarez’s trial due to issues with redaction of Tavarez’s statement. Asmelash was tried separately in May 2019 and found guilty on all charges, including malice murder and armed robbery. He was sentenced to life without parole and additional consecutive sentences. After a motion for new trial was denied by the trial court in April 2025, Asmelash appealed.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Asmelash’s claims that the trial court erred in denying the jury’s request to review surveillance video and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call an alibi witness. The Court held that any error in denying the jury’s request was harmless, as the video was cumulative of other evidence. The Court also found no prejudice from counsel’s failure to call the alibi witness, as her testimony conflicted with other evidence and was not compelling. The Court affirmed Asmelash’s convictions. View "ASMELASH v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns the shooting death of Darcy Jones at a nightclub in South Fulton, Georgia, on November 14, 2020. Tianvye Stitts, who worked as an unarmed security guard at the club, was present that night. Testimony at trial established that Stitts was seen with a gun, and after gunshots were heard, witnesses observed him exiting the restroom immediately after Jones, who had been shot, and then fleeing the scene in a Jeep. Additional evidence included Stitts’s erratic flight from the club, his subsequent attempt to evade law enforcement, and his use of a false name upon arrest. The prosecution’s case included testimony from Darrence Morgan, another security guard, who admitted to giving Stitts a gun before the shooting.A Fulton County grand jury indicted Stitts on multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and weapons offenses. At trial in May 2023, a jury found Stitts guilty on all counts. The Superior Court of Fulton County sentenced him to life in prison with the possibility of parole for malice murder, along with additional concurrent and consecutive sentences for other offenses. The court later merged the aggravated assault count with the malice murder count. Stitts’s motion for a new trial was denied after an evidentiary hearing.On appeal, the Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Stitts’s claims, including challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence, the lack of an accomplice-corroboration jury instruction, the giving of an Allen charge, the absence of a specific instruction on impeachment by prior felony conviction, and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the malice murder conviction, that any error in failing to give an accomplice-corroboration charge did not affect the outcome, that the jury instructions were adequate, and that Stitts’s counsel was not ineffective. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the convictions and sentences. View "STITTS v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Richard Merritt, an attorney, was convicted of malice murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime after the death of his mother, Shirley Merritt, in February 2019. Prior to the murder, Merritt had pled guilty to multiple theft-related felonies and was sentenced to prison, but was released on GPS monitoring pending his surrender. On the day he was to report to prison, Merritt met his ex-wife and daughter at a doctor’s appointment, returned to his mother’s house, and later left in her car with both their cell phones. He cut off his GPS monitor and disappeared. Shirley was found dead the next day, having suffered stab wounds and blunt-force trauma. Merritt was apprehended months later living under a false identity in Tennessee. At trial, Merritt claimed two unknown men killed his mother, but the jury rejected this account.The Superior Court of DeKalb County held a jury trial in May 2023, resulting in Merritt’s conviction on all counts. He was sentenced to life without parole for malice murder and a consecutive five years for possession of a knife. Other counts were vacated or merged. Merritt filed a motion for new trial, which was denied after an evidentiary hearing in January 2025.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Merritt’s appeal. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and that Merritt failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel regarding cross-examination, closing argument, or other trial strategies. Claims regarding shackling and an alleged Brady violation were deemed waived. The court found no cumulative error and affirmed the convictions. The Supreme Court of Georgia’s judgment was to affirm Merritt’s convictions. View "MERRITT v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Victor Allen Smith was involved in a fatal collision on March 6, 2022, in Gwinnett County, Georgia, after attempting to evade a Georgia State Patrol trooper during a high-speed pursuit. Smith, driving a silver sports car, made improper lane changes and exceeded the speed limit, reaching speeds estimated at over 120 miles per hour. While fleeing, Smith’s vehicle veered onto the interstate shoulder where Hugo Nathaniel Martinez was waiting for his truck to be towed. Smith’s car struck and killed Martinez, who died from severe blunt-force injuries. Smith exhibited signs of intoxication at the scene, and subsequent toxicology tests revealed a blood alcohol concentration of 0.188. Evidence also showed that Smith’s driver’s license had been suspended since 2004.Smith was indicted by a Gwinnett County grand jury on multiple charges, including felony murder, homicide by vehicle, aggravated assault, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, driving under the influence, and other traffic offenses. Prior to trial, certain counts were dismissed, including driving while license suspended. At trial in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County, the jury found Smith guilty on all remaining counts. Smith was sentenced to life in prison without parole for felony murder, with additional concurrent sentences for other offenses. After the trial court denied his motion for a new trial, Smith appealed.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Smith’s sole claim that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of his suspended driver’s license. Applying an abuse of discretion standard, the Supreme Court assumed, without deciding, that admitting the evidence may have been erroneous but found any error harmless due to the overwhelming evidence of Smith’s guilt and the minimal role the license suspension played at trial. The Court affirmed Smith’s convictions. View "SMITH v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns a shooting that occurred on March 15, 2022, in Griffin, Georgia, resulting in the death of Wildarius Draggs and the assault of Rayshon Goodrum. Surveillance footage showed that Draggs and Goodrum were sitting on a porch when a car containing Isaac Reid, Kinesa Harvey, DeQuivon McMullin, and Cameron Barkley drove by. Later, Reid, McMullin, and Barkley exited the car, walked behind a nearby house, and shortly thereafter, shots were fired at Draggs and Goodrum. Barkley, a co-defendant, testified that Reid fired the shots, motivated by the belief that a rival gang member was present. Physical evidence included shell casings at the scene and a photograph of a gold gun allegedly used in the shooting. Draggs died from his injuries, and Goodrum survived.The Superior Court of Spalding County conducted a joint trial for Reid, Harvey, and McMullin. The jury acquitted Harvey of all charges, found Reid guilty of malice murder and other offenses (but not guilty on one gang-related count), and found McMullin guilty of aggravated battery and felony murder predicated on that battery. Reid was sentenced to life without parole plus consecutive sentences for aggravated assault and a gang violation. Reid filed a motion for new trial, which was denied. He then appealed.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case after it was transferred from the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the evidence was sufficient under federal due process standards to support Reid’s convictions, finding that the jury could reasonably conclude Reid was the shooter based on the surveillance footage, testimony, and corroborating evidence. The Court also found that the statutory requirement for corroboration of accomplice testimony was met. The denial of Reid’s motion for new trial was affirmed, and his convictions were upheld. View "REID v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

On the night of January 3, 2016, the defendant, along with two accomplices, planned and executed a burglary at the home of a family friend. The group traveled together to the residence, where they confronted the victim, Caleb Short, outside the house. The defendant and another accomplice forcibly subdued and bound Caleb with tape, then moved him to the backyard. Subsequently, the group entered the house, stole various items including vehicles, and left the scene. The next morning, law enforcement discovered the bodies of Caleb, his mother, and his niece, all of whom had suffered fatal injuries. Evidence linked the defendant to the stolen property and to actions taken before, during, and after the crimes.A Muscogee County grand jury indicted the defendant and his accomplices on multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder, kidnapping, burglary, and theft by taking. At trial in the Superior Court of Muscogee County, the defendant’s co-defendants pleaded guilty, and the jury found the defendant guilty of felony murder (as to Caleb), kidnapping, burglary, and theft by taking, but could not reach a verdict on other counts, leading to a mistrial on those. The court sentenced the defendant to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole and additional concurrent and consecutive terms. The defendant’s motion for new trial was denied, and after procedural delays, he filed a timely appeal.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and affirmed the convictions. The Court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, including as a party to the crimes. It found no abuse of discretion in admitting post-incision autopsy photographs, giving an Allen charge to the jury, denying a change of venue due to pretrial publicity, or refusing to impanel a new jury after the co-defendants pleaded guilty. The Court concluded that none of the alleged errors warranted reversal. View "BURKS v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns an individual who was charged with malice murder and related offenses after fatally stabbing a man with whom he had no prior relationship. On the day of the incident, the accused exhibited unusual behavior at work, left the premises, and later entered a bank where he appeared confused and reported hearing voices. After a police officer stopped him for a traffic violation, the accused was taken to a hospital and subsequently to a behavioral health facility. There, detectives interviewed him, and he admitted to the killing, describing delusional beliefs and auditory hallucinations. Forensic evidence linked him to the crime, and expert testimony at trial addressed his mental state, with differing opinions on whether his psychosis was drug-induced and whether he could distinguish right from wrong at the time of the offense.A Catoosa County grand jury indicted the accused on multiple counts, including malice murder. After a jury trial, he was found guilty but mentally ill of malice murder and other charges. The trial court sentenced him to life with the possibility of parole for malice murder and additional consecutive time for possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. The court vacated the felony murder count by operation of law and merged the aggravated assault count. The accused filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court.On appeal to the Supreme Court of Georgia, the appellant argued that his statements to law enforcement at the behavioral health facility should have been suppressed because he was in custody and had not received Miranda warnings, and that the trial court erred in refusing certain jury instructions related to his insanity defense and voluntary intoxication. The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the appellant was not in custody for Miranda purposes during the interview, and that the trial court’s jury instructions adequately covered the applicable law. The court affirmed the convictions. View "GRAVITT v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

The case concerns the fatal shooting of Michael Riley in his home on June 30, 2013. Police investigation revealed that Riley’s wife, Antoinette Riley, and her daughter, Katrina Ledford, were involved in a plot to kill Riley, with Tarell Momon, who was incarcerated and romantically involved with Ledford, allegedly orchestrating the murder. Cell phone records showed extensive communication between Momon, Ledford, and Antoinette, as well as with two other individuals, Terrance Griswould and Travis Berrian, who were implicated as co-conspirators. The evidence included text messages indicating planning and coordination of the murder, and testimony about Momon’s gang affiliation and prison conduct.A Bulloch County grand jury indicted Momon, Griswould, Ledford, and Antoinette Riley for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Ledford and Antoinette pleaded guilty, while Momon and Griswould were tried together. The jury found Momon guilty of murder but acquitted him of the firearm charge; Griswould was acquitted on all counts. Momon was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. He filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court after several amendments and delays.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Momon’s appeal, in which he argued that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to make certain evidentiary objections and that the cumulative effect of these alleged errors denied him a fair trial. The court held that Momon failed to demonstrate either deficient performance by his counsel or resulting prejudice under the standard set by Strickland v. Washington. The court found that the challenged evidence was either admissible, cumulative, or not prejudicial, and that counsel’s decisions were within the bounds of reasonable trial strategy. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed. View "MOMON v. THE STATE" on Justia Law