Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Anthony Williams appealed his conviction and sentence for malice murder in connection with the 1992 fatal shooting of Jeanette Woodson. He challenged the admission at trial of similar transaction evidence and a portion of the State’s closing argument, which he contended constituted improper comment on his failure to testify. Finding the challenges to be unavailing, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Larry Lupoe, Kyshawn Williams, and Jacobey Carter were found guilty at trial of the 2012 malice murder of Tavares Moses, the aggravated assault and armed robbery of Carlos Wilson, the aggravated assault of Deandre Miller and Jumario Booker, and related crimes. All appealed, and the Supreme Court affirmed the three appellants’ convictions. However, the Court identified merger errors in sentencing that required vacating their sentences in part and remanding for resentencing View "Lupoe v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Sherwin Johnson was awaiting trial on felony murder and other charges in connection with the April 2014 shooting death of Kevin Pierre. In May 2015, the trial court entered an order denying Appellant’s motion for discharge and acquittal on speedy trial grounds, and on June 5, 2015, Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal of that order. The Supreme Court found that the trial court properly denied Appellant’s motion with respect to his statutory right to a speedy trial, and affirmed that portion of the trial court’s ruling. However, the court failed to make the required findings of fact and conclusions of law to enable the Supreme Court to evaluate the denial of Appellant’s motion with respect to his constitutional speedy trial right. Accordingly, the Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s ruling in that regard and remanded for the entry of an order containing appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Court did not address Appellant’s many other enumerations of error, finding they all lacked merit. View "Johnson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Cleve McCain was convicted of malice murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony and possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer, all relating to the 2007 shooting death of Whitt Timms. The trial court denied appellant’s motion for new trial, and he appealed, arguing the evidence presented against him at trial was insufficient to sustain his conviction. After review of the trial court record and finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "McCain v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Elliot Sheard was convicted of murder and associated crimes in connection with the stabbing death of Charles Elder. A grand jury indicted Sheard – along with two co-defendants – on the charges of murder, felony murder predicated on aggravated assault, felony murder predicated on armed robbery, felony murder predicated on burglary, aggravated assault, armed robbery, and burglary. Following a joint trial conducted in late August and early September 1998, a jury acquitted Sheard of murder but found him guilty of all other offenses. After merging the felony murder and aggravated assault verdicts, the trial court sentenced Sheard to life imprisonment for felony murder predicated on aggravated assault and to consecutive terms of 20 years’ imprisonment for armed robbery and burglary, for a total sentence of life plus 40 years. A jury acquitted one co-defendant of all offenses and found Sheard guilty of all offenses. In its May 2014 order denying Sheard’s motion for new trial, the trial court found – based on its own recollection of the 1998 trial and its standard practice – that the closing arguments of the parties were unremarkable, that the transcript of the charge conference established that the jury was adequately and appropriately charged, that testimony recounting a number of questions from the jury was not credible and was, in fact, unlikely, and that it was unlikely the jury was given an "Allen" charge but, if one were to have been given, it would have been a pattern charge. Sheard appealed, arguing that missing portions of his trial transcript rendered his appeal meaningless. In light of a number of factors complicating the absence of portions of the trial transcript, the Supreme Court agreed that Sheard was entitled to a new trial and reversed the judgment of the trial court. View "Sheard v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following a jury trial, J’Quante Crews was found guilty of malice murder (Count 1), two counts of felony murder (Counts 2 and 4), aggravated assault (Count 5), armed robbery (Count 6), possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Count 7), and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (Count 8) in connection with his role in the shooting death of Vernon Forrest. On appeal, Crews argued that his convictions should have been reversed and that he should have been granted a new trial due to alleged juror misconduct, and that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence expert testimony from a lay witness. After review, the Supreme Court found no merit to Crews’ challenges and affirmed his convictions. However, the Court also found that trial court erred with respect to the portion of Crews’ sentence relating to armed robbery (Count 6), so it vacated the erroneous portion of Crews’ sentence and remanded this case to the trial court for the imposition of an appropriate sentence on the armed robbery count. View "Crews v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant DeMariye Glover was indicted, along with a co-defendant, of malice murder, felony murder, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, all arising out of the shooting death of Demetrious Moore during an attempted armed robbery. He appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to felony murder, arguing he had not knowingly entered the guilty plea (even though the undisputed evidence showed he was not the shooter), and that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. After review of the trial proceedings, the Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed appellant's convictions. View "Glover v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Xzarious Terrell was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime in connection with the 2009 shooting death of victim Henry Wright, Jr. Appellant's motion for new trial was denied, and on appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and claimed error in the trial court’s admission of statements of a non-testifying co-indictee under the co-conspirator hearsay exception. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Terrell v. Georgia" on Justia Law

After conducting a bench trial, the trial court found appellant Norman Buford guilty but mentally ill for the shooting death of Willie Archer and the aggravated assault of Orantes Dishmond. Buford argued on appeal that the trial court erred by not finding him not guilty by reason of insanity. Finding the evidence sufficient to support the trial court's verdict, the Supreme Court affirmed in that respect. However, the Court found that the trial court erroneously sentenced Buford to life in prison for both malice murder and felony murder. The Court vacated the sentence and remanded this case for resentencing. View "Buford v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Court of Appeals affirmed Jaylend Glispie's convictions for violation of the Georgia Controlled Substance Act and certain driving offenses. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider: (1) whether the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that text messages sent to the cell phone found in Glispie’s possession were admissible as party admissions; and (2) whether the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the trial court did not err in denying Glispie’s motion in limine to exclude the text messages. Glispie contended that all of the text messages from his cell phone constituted inadmissible hearsay, and that the search warrant application for his phone failed to provide probable cause enough to justify the warrant. After review of the appellate court record, the Supreme Court found that: (1) the admission of the incoming text messages, even if considered to be hearsay, did not contribute to the verdict; and (2) there was a legally sufficient basis for the magistrate to issue a search warrant for the cell phones in Glispie’s possession. View "Glispie v. Georgia" on Justia Law