Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Articles Posted in Criminal Law
by
Jehaziel Carter was convicted of malice murder, financial-transaction card fraud, and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Eric Chepkuto. On appeal, Carter argued the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions, and in particular, the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for financial-transaction card fraud. The trial court record revealed Chepkuto was found dead in the apartment he shared with his wife rom a gunshot to the face. A review of Chepkuto’s cell phone and bank records led police to Carter, who was unemployed and living with his cousin at the time. Chepkuto’s work phone was found behind the couch where Carter slept. Carter’s backpack contained paperwork and other items belonging to Carter, as well as ammunition and a gun that was later determined to have fired the bullet that killed Chepkuto. Bank records and other evidence show five attempts to access money from an ATM using Carter's debit card were made; a purchase was made for an item costing close to $4,000; the receipt listed Carter's e-mail address, and specified the item was to be delivered to the address of the mother of Carter's child. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed on the fraud count, finding the evidence was legally sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis other than Carter’s guilt and to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Carter was guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted, other than the financial-transaction card fraud. But because the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury’s guilty verdicts on the other counts, the Court affirmed Carter’s remaining convictions. View "Carter v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
In 2014, Montravious Bradley entered a non-negotiated guilty plea to murder and other offenses in connection with the death of Jerrick Jackson during the armed robbery of Jackson and his fiancee, Kimberly Little. After entry of judgment, Bradley filed a timely motion to withdraw his guilty plea, contending that his guilty plea was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered. The trial court denied the motion. Bradley appealed, arguing the trial court failed to advise him of the sentencing range for murder and felony murder, but advised him instead only of the maximum sentence authorized for those offenses, and that the trial court therefore improperly failed to advise him of the direct consequences of entering a guilty plea. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed, except that it vacated in part to correct a sentencing error. View "Bradley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Robert Williams was convicted of murder and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. He appealed pro se the denial of his motion to recuse and the apparent denial of his motion to vacate an earlier order, in which the trial court refused his motion to correct certain transcripts. Finding no cognizable claim of error presented by Williams in this appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the judgment below. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Shane Collett appealed his convictions for malice murder and concealing the death of another in connection with the 2012 death of nine-year-old Skylar Dials. Collett challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support these convictions and argues that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of reckless conduct or on mistake of fact. The Georgia Supreme Court found the evidence was sufficient and the instructions were unwarranted. View "Collett v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
In 1999, appellant Donald Davis pled guilty to the murder of Shereka Smith, for which he was convicted and sentenced. Davis did not timely pursue a direct appeal. Following his unsuccessful pursuit of a writ of habeas corpus, he filed a motion for an out-of-time appeal of his conviction, which the trial court denied. Davis appealed that denial to the Georgia Supreme Court. "[F]rustrating Davis’s present effort to obtain an out-of-time appeal is the doctrine of res judicata." The Court found that Davis filed a habeas petition in 2002, and the habeas court denied Davis relief. Although Davis did not “plainly raise in the [petition for writ of habeas corpus] the issues he raises now, there is no reason he could not have.” Therefore, because the trial court was precluded from considering this claim, it did not err in denying Davis’s motion for out-of-time appeal. View "Davis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Appellant Kyle Strother was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Cristobal Becerre-Contreras. Appellant argued on appeal: (1) that the evidence presented at his trial was legally insufficient to support his convictions; (2) that the trial court failed to act as the “thirteenth juror” when it denied his motion for new trial; (3) that the court erred by admitting character evidence related to gang activities and other murders; (4) that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by “opening the door” to that character evidence; and (5) that he was denied a fair trial when one of his co-defendants allegedly testified falsely. The Georgia Supreme Court found each of Appellant’s claims was meritless, so it affirmed. View "Strother v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Shontori Gooden appealed after the denial of her motion to withdraw her plea of guilty to felony murder, asserting as her sole enumeration of error that the case should be remanded for a hearing on alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. In 2016, Gooden was indicted for felony murder and other crimes arising out of the October 2016 shooting of Nyla Foster. Represented by a public defender, Gooden entered a negotiated plea of guilty to felony murder and was sentenced. Through different counsel she filed a motion to withdraw her guilty plea some time later; as soon as the hearing on that motion began, new counsel moved for a continuance. Counsel stated at first, Gooden wanted to drop her motion to withdraw her plea. He sent the necessary papers to her to withdraw the motion, but she signed them on the wrong signature line; he sent them to her again, but she signed them in too many places, including the signature line for a witness; he sent them to her a final time, but he received no response. He concluded that it would be simpler to have Gooden attend the hearing and withdraw the motion in person, but when he met with her immediately before the hearing, she told him that she wanted to proceed with the motion to withdraw her guilty plea after all. Counsel also informed the court that Gooden had told him that she had mental health issues and refused medication while detained at the county jail but that she had begun taking medication again once in state custody and “is thinking better and that’s why she wants to go forward.” The trial court denied the motion for a continuance and went forward with the hearing. Daniel called no witnesses and presented no evidence but argued that the public defender should have moved for a psychiatric evaluation before allowing Gooden to enter a guilty plea. The Georgia Supreme Court determined could not meet her burden of showing her plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance and affirmed denial of her motion to withdraw her guilty plea. View "Gooden v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Appellant Johnny Ray Cochran was convicted of murder and a related offense arising out of the shooting death of Melony Strickland. On appeal, Cochran argued the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions and that trial counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance in various ways. Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Cochran v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Appellant James Spell was tried and convicted of two murders, an aggravated battery, an aggravated assault, and two firearm offenses, all in connection with the fatal stabbing of his ex-wife and the fatal shootings of her parents. On appeal, he claimed he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial. The Georgia Supreme Court found no merit in this claim, but noted the trial court erred when it failed to merge the aggravated battery and aggravated assault with one of the murders of which Appellant was convicted. Accordingly, the convictions for aggravated battery and aggravated assault were vacated; the convictions were affirmed in all other respects. View "Spell v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Gregory Haney and Ledarius Jackson appealed the denial of their respective motions for new trial after a jury found them guilty of malice murder, felony murder, and armed robbery in connection with the death of Gregory Smith. In Haney’s case, he argued the evidence presented against him at trial was insufficient for the jury to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt as to each of the charged offenses and that his defense counsel was ineffective for failing to object to certain opinion and identification testimony offered by two of the State’s witnesses. In Jackson’s case, he also challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him by the State as to each count of the indictment. Additionally, he argued his defense counsel was ineffective for failing to raise an objection, pursuant to Bruton v. United States, 391 U. S. 123 (1968), to certain statements made by State witnesses who recounted statements made by Haney implicating Jackson in the crime and for failing to object to the introduction of an audio tape of a conversation between Jackson and his girlfriend. Finding no merit in any of these enumerations, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed both defendants’ convictions. View "Haney v. Georgia" on Justia Law