Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Articles Posted in Criminal Law
Nicholson v. Georgia
Appellants Marques Nicholson and Ramon Nichols were tried together and convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the gang-related shooting death of Derrick Linkhorn. On appeal, both appellants contended the evidence presented at their trial was insufficient to support their convictions, and that the trial court abused its discretion by denying their motions to sever their cases for trial. Nicholson also contended the trial court erred by admitting certain cell phone records, and Nichols contended the court erred by admitting certain social media records. After review of the record and the briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed both appellants' convictions. View "Nicholson v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Georgia v. Rumph
The State appealed an interlocutory order of the Superior Court of Columbia County, Georgia suppressing two statements that Christopher Rumph made to law enforcement officers prior to his arrest on murder and other criminal charges. The trial court suppressed the statements on the ground that the police had failed to give Rumph Miranda warnings prior to interviewing him. The State contended that the trial court erred in suppressing the statements because, as Rumph was not in custody, Miranda warnings were not required. After review of the record, the Georgia Supreme Court concurred with the State's reasoning and reversed the trial court’s order. View "Georgia v. Rumph" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Wilkerson v. Georgia
After he was tried by jury and found guilty of ten aggravated assaults, Jason Wilkerson moved for new trial. The trial court granted his motion as to three of the assaults, concluding that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wilkerson was guilty of those assaults, and concluding as well that a new trial was warranted upon the “general grounds.” The State appealed, and in Georgia v. Wilkerson, 820 SE2d 60 (2018), the Court of Appeals reversed the determination that the evidence was legally insufficient, and vacated the grant of a new trial on the general grounds. With respect to the general grounds, the Court of Appeals acknowledged that a trial court has substantial discretion to award a new trial under the general grounds, but it concluded that the trial court abused its discretion by improperly conflating the standard for the general grounds and the distinct standard by which the legal sufficiency of the evidence is assessed. The Georgia Supreme Court issued a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the Court of Appeals as to the general grounds, and reversed. The Supreme Court noted the Court of Appeals was right to note that the general grounds and a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence presented distinct issues. But absent some indication in the record to the contrary, "we generally presume that trial judges understand this distinction, and here, the record gives us no reason to conclude that the trial court erroneously conflated the general grounds and the legal sufficiency of the evidence." View "Wilkerson v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Carter v. Georgia
Devontae Carter was tried by jury and convicted of the malice murder of Dexter Lampkin, and of the aggravated assault of Gregory Lampkin, by shooting them with a handgun. He appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. After review of the evidence presented at trial, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed Carter’s convictions. View "Carter v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Jordan v. Georgia
Wayan Jordan was tried by jury and convicted of murder and other crimes in connection with the fatal shooting of Craigory Burch. Jordan appealed, contending that the State failed to present evidence legally sufficient to sustain his convictions, he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial, and that the trial court erred when it admitted certain evidence of gang activity. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error, and affirmed Jordan’s convictions. View "Jordan v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Morrall v. Georgia
Appellant Brandon Morrall challenged his 2013 convictions for malice murder and a firearm offense in connection with the 2011 shooting death of Stephen “Tucker” Jackson. Appellant chose to represent himself on appeal, and his sole enumeration of error was that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to his trial counsel’s failure to file a motion to prevent an eyewitness from identifying him at trial as the shooter. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Morrall v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Holmes v. Georgia
Ronnie Holmes challenged his 2015 convictions for felony murder and other crimes in connection with the 2013 shooting death of Terry Mack. Holmes argued the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict on the armed robbery charge underlying his felony murder conviction and his felony murder conviction, and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move to sever his trial from that of his co-defendant, Michael Woods. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Holmes v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Hopwood v. Georgia
Carla Rae Hopwood was tried by jury and convicted of murder in connection with the 2012 fatal shooting of her longtime boyfriend, Ernest Bray. Hopwood appealed, contending that the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain her conviction and that the trial court erred when it admitted a statement that she gave to an investigator. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no merit in these claims of error, and affirmed. View "Hopwood v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Mattei v. Georgia
Paul Mattei was tried by jury and found guilty of malice murder, aggravated assault, and various other offenses in connection with the shooting death of Angela Williams. On appeal, Mattei contended the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred by admitting at trial character evidence in violation of OCGA 24-4-404 (b). Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Mattei’s convictions. View "Mattei v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Jones v. Georgia
Demiko Jones was tried by jury and convicted of murder and other crimes in connection with the 2015 fatal shooting of Rodney Stafford. On appeal, Jones claimed the trial court abused its discretion when it excused a juror after deliberations were underway. The Georgia Supreme Court found no merit in this claim. However, the Supreme Court did agree, however, with Jones’s contention that the State failed to present sufficient evidence under OCGA 24-14-8 to establish that he was guilty of the unlawful possession of a firearm by a first-offender probationer. As a result, Jones’s conviction for possession by a first-offender probationer was reversed, but all other convictions were affirmed. View "Jones v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law