Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant Antonio Shaw was convicted of the malice murder of Shomari Grier, criminal attempt to commit the murder of Ashley McCord, aggravated assault of Lashaun Brown, and three counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Appellant contended on appeal to the Supreme Court that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of a witness’s alleged gang affiliation and in not instructing the jury on voluntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of murder. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Shaw v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Cordado Burrell was tried and convicted of murder and related offenses in connection with crimes he committed against Herman Upshaw and Ruth Griffith. Burrell appealed, claiming: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) the trial court committed reversible error during trial; and (4) the State failed to disclose exculpatory evidence in violation of “Brady v. Maryland.” Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Burrell v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Heather Kimbrough and Melissa Mayfield were charged by indictment with a violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The indictment alleged that Kimbrough and Mayfield, being associated with an enterprise, violated the Act by participating in the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, and it identified the alleged enterprise and pattern of racketeering activity. But other than the allegation that Kimbrough and Mayfield participated in the enterprise “through” a pattern of racketeering activity, the indictment said nothing at all about the alleged connection between the enterprise and the racketeering. Seeking more detail about that alleged connection, Kimbrough and Mayfield filed special demurrers. The trial court, however, denied the special demurrers, and Kimbrough and Mayfield appealed. The Court of Appeals held that the indictment contained enough detail about the connection between the enterprise and the racketeering activity to survive a special demurrer, and it affirmed the denial of Kimbrough and Mayfield’s special demurrers. The Supreme Court issued a writ of certiorari to review that decision, and reversed: “To be clear, we do not mean to suggest that a RICO indictment must contain pages and pages of extensive detail about the connection between the enterprise and the pattern of racketeering activity. We hold only that the sparse allegations of this indictment - which says nothing at all about the nature of the connection - are insufficient to enable the defendants to prepare for trial. Accordingly, the special demurrers ought to have been sustained, and the Court of Appeals erred when it affirmed the denial of the special demurrers.” In that respect, the judgment of the Court of Appeals was reversed. View "Kimbrough v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Jamarrcus Sullivan was tried and convicted of murder and related offenses in connection with the shooting death of Kevin Daniel and aggravated assault of Kamenika Whatley. Sullivan appealed, claiming that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Though the Georgia Supreme Court found no merit in Sullivan’s claims of ineffective assistance, it did find error with regard to his sentences, and, therefore, the Court vacated the sentences and remanded for re-sentencing. View "Sullivan v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 1999,Joe Carr was tried by jury and convicted of the murder of Ernest Golden. Carr’s conviction was affirmed on appeal by the Georgia Supreme Court, but the trial court granted Carr’s extraordinary motion for new trial after his brother confessed to the murder. Soon thereafter, Carr’s brother recanted his confession, Carr was retried, and Carr again was found guilty of Golden’s murder. Carr appealed, contending that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Carr also claimed that the trial court improperly “derailed” his attempt to enter into a favorable plea agreement prior to trial. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Supreme Court found no error, and affirmed. View "Carr v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following a jury trial, Ezwekwesiri Ngumezi appealed his convictions for murder, armed robbery, and related charges, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s finding of guilt for armed robbery and that the trial court erred by denying a request to charge on voluntary manslaughter. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Ngumezi v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Timothy Sapp was tried and convicted of murder and related offenses in connection with the shooting death of Christopher Smith. In his sole enumeration of error, Sapp claimed that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to authorize a conviction as, he alleged, he was convicted on purely circumstantial evidence. After review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court disagreed and affirmed Sapp’s convictions. View "Sapp v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Kevaughn Rainwater was acquitted of malice murder, but found guilty of felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, in the 2012 shooting death of Antavious Maddox. He appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, claiming violations of the continuing witness rule, and contending he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed his convictions. View "Rainwater v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2013, a grand jury indicted Yonatan Bello for sexual exploitation of children, alleging that he unlawfully possessed video recordings that depict children engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Pursuant to OCGA 17-16-4 (a) (3), Bello demanded that the State produce the video recordings, as well as a written report that was prepared by law enforcement personnel in connection with a forensic examination of Bello’s personal computer. The prosecuting attorneys offered to make arrangements for the defense lawyers to inspect those materials at a secure law enforcement facility, but because the materials contained depictions of children engaged in sexually explicit conduct, the prosecuting attorneys refused to provide copies of the materials to the defense. Bello continued to insist that he was entitled to copies of the video recordings and forensic report, so he filed motions to compel the State to produce copies of those materials. The trial court denied the motions, and this appeal followed. After review, the Supreme Court concluded that OCGA 17-16-4(a)(3)(B) was constitutional on its face, and based on the record of this case, concluded it was constitutional as applied in this case. Accordingly, the trial court properly denied the motions, and the Court affirmed the trial court's judgment. View "Bello v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Trey Dinkins appealed his convictions for malice murder and other crimes related to the 2011 shooting death of DaJohn Milton. Appellant testified at trial. He denied shooting the victim, claiming he was at his cousin’s house at the time the shooting took place. He admitted, however, that he was at the scene of the shooting after the incident because he was getting a ride from his cousin’s house. Several witnesses confirmed appellant and another present at the shooting were together a short time afterward. Appellant made several arguments in appeal of his convictions, arguing among other things, that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions and that he received constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's convictions. View "Dinkins v. Georgia" on Justia Law