Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant Reginald Lofton challenged his 2016 conviction for being a party to felony murder predicated on the armed robbery and shooting death of pizza delivery driver Shane Varnadore. Appellant claimed on appeal that the trial court made a number of evidentiary errors and that his trial counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance in two respects. Finding no errors, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed conviction. View "Lofton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Christopher Calmer shot two Monroe County Georgia sheriff’s deputies, Michael Norris and Jeffrey Wilson, after they opened the door to his residence in response to a 911 call. Wilson recovered, but Norris died of his injuries. Following a jury trial, Calmer was convicted of malice murder and other offenses arising out of the shooting. Calmer contended on appeal that the trial court erred by failing to charge the jury on justification and on the lesser offenses of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. He also contended the court erred in denying his motion for immunity from prosecution. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Calmer v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Derrick Middleton was convicted by jury of one count of hijacking a motor vehicle, one count of theft by receiving by retaining the stolen vehicle, and several other crimes relating to a 2014 armed robbery and carjacking. Middleton filed a motion for new trial, which was subsequently amended, contending, among other things, that the verdicts for hijacking a motor vehicle and theft by receiving that vehicle were mutually exclusive and, consequently, that any judgment entered on these verdicts was void. The trial court denied Middleton’s motion, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial in part, holding that Middleton had waived the issue of mutually exclusive verdicts as to hijacking a motor vehicle and theft by receiving the same motor vehicle by failing to object to the verdicts at the time they were rendered. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari, responding to two questions: (1) whether a defendant must object to the form of the verdicts at the time they are rendered in order to assert on appeal that convictions are mutually exclusive; and (2) whether convictions for hijacking and theft by receiving the same vehicle were mutually exclusive. The parties suggested, to which the Court agreed, that the answer to the first question was "no." With respect to the second question, the Supreme Court concluded that convictions for hijacking and theft by receiving the same vehicle were mutually exclusive. The Court therefore reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals in part and remanded the case for further proceedings. View "Middleton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Vernon Priester was tried by jury and convicted of murder and other crimes in connection with the 2016 fatal shooting of Akhil Heyward and the wounding of Heyward’s parents. He appealed, arguing the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of two witnesses who commented on Priester dealing drugs. The State cross-appealed, contending the trial court erred in merging two counts of attempted murder into two counts of aggravated battery involving the same victims. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed conviction in Priester's appeal, and concurred with the State that the trial court erred in merging the counts. Judgment on the State's cross-appeal was reversed and the matter remanded for resentencing. View "Priester v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Isadore Barboza was convicted of malice murder and other crimes after he, Renee Harris, and Quondre Bentley committed an armed robbery of Ebone Driskell and Exzavious Brooks in a restaurant parking lot that resulted in the deaths of Bentley and Driskell. In this appeal, Barboza argued the trial court erred: (1) by commenting on Harris’s testimony; (2) admitting an exhibit used to prove Barboza's prior armed robbery conviction; and (3) sentencing Barboza as a recidivist. He also argued his counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to raise these claims at trial. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed conviction. View "Barboza v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Aaron Strong was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault, and knife-possession offenses based on the fatal stabbing of his wife’s son, Maurice Arnold, and the stabbing of her grandson, Deandre Arnold. At his trial, Appellant claimed that he acted in self-defense. His main contention on appeal was that the trial court abused its discretion when it admitted under OCGA 24-4- 404 (b) voluminous evidence of multiple other acts of violence that he allegedly committed. While the Georgia Supreme Court agreed the trial court did abuse its discretion by admitting that evidence, and because those evidentiary errors were not harmless, the Court reversed Appellant’s convictions. "[A]lthough the jury could have found Appellant guilty if it believed the State’s witnesses and disbelieved Appellant, we cannot say that it is highly probable that the trial court’s erroneous admission of the voluminous evidence that Appellant had previously committed multiple serious violent acts did not contribute to the guilty verdicts that the jury retuned." View "Strong v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Contevious Stepp-McCommons appealed his convictions for felony murder and other crimes in connection with the 2013 shooting death of Clarence Gardenhire. On appeal, Stepp-McCommons McCommons alleged the trial court erred in failing to give certain jury charges and that he received constitutionally ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Because the Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the trial court did not err on the grounds raised by Stepp-McCommons and that he failed to establish his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, judgment was affirmed. View "Stepp-McCommons v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Terrence Burney was tried by jury and found guilty of malice murder and other offenses in connection with the death of Joseph Kitchens. Burney appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence presented against him was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict on the malice murder charge; (2) the trial court erred by not conducting a hearing pursuant to Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975); (3) the trial court abused its discretion by admitting testimony from the medical examiner as to the cause of the victim’s death; (4) he was denied his right to a speedy trial; and (5) he should be granted a new trial because a juror conducted internet research relevant to the case during deliberations. Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Burney v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2013 when he was 17 years old, Dantazias Raines was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole (“LWOP”) for malice murder. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Raines' convictions and sentences in part, reversed Raines' convictions for misdemeanor obstruction of a police officer, and vacated his sentence in part. On remand, Raines filed a motion for a jury to make the requisite determination under Veal v. Georgia, 784 SE2d 403 (2016). The trial court denied his motion and certified its order for immediate review. The Supreme Court granted Raines' request for interlocutory review to consider whether a defendant facing a sentence of life without parole for an offense committed when he was a juvenile had a constitutional right to have a jury (as opposed to a judge) make the requisite determination of whether he was “irreparably corrupt” or “permanently incorrigible.” Raines argued in favor of having a jury make the determination prior to imposition of a LWOP sentence; the State argued a defendant did not have a right under the Sixth Amendment for the jury to make the "specific determination" outlined in Veal. The Supreme Court held a defendant convicted of committing murder as a juvenile did not have a federal constitutional right to have a jury determine, in accordance with Veal and the Sixth Amendment, whether he was irreparably corrupt or permanently incorrigible such that he may be sentenced to LWOP, thereby affirming the trial court. View "Raines v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Shanika Dunbar was convicted by jury for the murder of Theron Robbins, and for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. On appeal, she contended the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the verdict, the trial court erred by admitting an irrelevant AK-47 rifle into evidence, and the trial court erred by allowing testimony regarding the withdrawal of consent to search Dunbar’s home. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed conviction. View "Dunbar v. Georgia" on Justia Law