Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Stanley Harris was tried by jury and convicted of: malice murder, the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and tampering with evidence. These charges were brought in connection with the fatal shooting of his wife, Haneefah Harris. Harris argued on appeal that the trial court erred when it refused to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Harris v. Georgia" on Justia Law

On August 14, 2009, a grand jury indicted Samuel Ellis, along with co-defendant Quantavious Harris, for malice murder, felony murder predicated on aggravated assault, aggravated assault, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. Ellis and Harris were tried separately. In May 2012, following a three-day jury trial, Ellis was convicted of all counts. He was sentenced to life for the malice murder, 5 years’ probation consecutive for the criminal attempt conviction, and 5 years’ probation (suspended) consecutive for the weapons charge. The felony murder count was vacated by operation of law, and the trial court merged the aggravated assault count with the malice murder count. Ellis appeals, alleging that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions and that the trial court erroneously admitted his custodial statement at trial. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Ellis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Allan Ray Williams was indicted in connection with the death of infant Collen Durden. Specifically, Williams was charged with felony murder “while in the commission of a felony, Contributing to the Deprivation of a Minor, by willfully failing to care for said child so that [he] died from asphyxiation in violation of OCGA 16-12-1 (b) (3).” The Georgia Supreme Court granted an interlocutory appeal to address whether OCGA 16-12-1, as it applied to felony contributing to the deprivation or delinquency of a minor, qualified as a predicate offense for felony murder. The Court held that it did not and reversed the trial court. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2011, Ronald Fisher was indicted for malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony for the shooting death of Eddie Shaheed. Fisher appealed his ultimate conviction for malice murder, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict and that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Fisher v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Benji Cortez Sanders was tried by jury and convicted of the murder of Sheila Freeman. Sanders appealed, contending that: (1) the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial; and (3) that it erred when it discharged a juror after the trial was underway. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Supreme Court found no reversible error, and affirmed. View "Sanders v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Chrissharnard Stewart, Christopher Snelson, and Courtney Smith appealed their convictions for the felony murder of Eric Smith, the aggravated assault of Khaljil Smith, and the aggravated assault of Sabrina Crary. The crimes took place in 2012 when the three sought to purchase marijuana and a dispute arose over how much was owed. The Supreme Court affirmed the three appellants’ convictions, but identified a merger error in sentencing that required vacating their sentences in part and remanding for resentencing. View "Stewart v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Courtney DuBose was tried by jury and convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault, and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, all in connection with the shooting death of Atima Smith. In Case No. S16A1299, DuBose appealed his conviction and sentence, contending that the trial court erred when it sentenced him for felony murder rather than voluntary manslaughter, when it sentenced him separately for felony murder and aggravated assault, and when it charged the jury on voluntary manslaughter. The Supreme Court concluded those contentions lacked merit, and affirmed. In Case No. S16A1300, DuBose appealed a trial court order clarified his sentence, but he failed to assert any claim of error as to that order. Accordingly, the Court dismissed that case. View "DuBose v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellants Johnny McClendon and Marquice Burks were tried jointly and convicted of malice murder and related offenses in connection with the April 2007 shooting death of Christopher Crawford. Both men appealed. After review, the Supreme Court found no merit in any of the alleged pre-trial and trial phase issues raised by Appellants, though the Court agreed with Burks that the trial court erred during sentencing when it failed to recognize that his felony murder verdicts were vacated by operation of law. Further, although not raised by McClendon, the trial court’s purported merger of his felony murder verdicts was similarly made in error. Therefore, the Supreme Court vacated those aspects of the sentences and remanded for further proceedings. View "McClendon v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Prisoner Lester Waller appealed pro se the denial of his motion for an out-of-time appeal following his convictions and sentences for malice murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony in connection with the May 2009 killing of his former girlfriend. Waller argued that he should have been granted an out-of-time appeal because his right to a direct appeal was frustrated in that pursuant to OCGA 5-6-38 (a), he was entitled to 30 days to file his notice of appeal after the denial of his supplemented motion for new trial but he was given only 24 days in which to timely file his notice of appeal. Waller claimed he did not receive the denial order until November 27, 2013. He further argued that he should have been able to take advantage of the “mailbox rule” to make his notice of appeal timely. He also argued that he was not adequately advised of the perils of proceeding pro se, that he should have had “standby” counsel, that he should have been appointed yet another attorney, and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Finding no merit to any of these contentions, the Supreme court affirmed the denial of Waller's motion. View "Waller v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Warden Brad Hooks appealed the grant of Ray Walley’s application for a writ of habeas corpus after the habeas court ruled that Walley’s appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to pursue a claim of ineffective assistance by trial counsel. Walley was indicted by grand jury of one count of aggravated sexual battery and one count of child molestation. The State’s articulated plea offer included a recommendation that he serve seven years in prison. His original trial counsel was Billy Spruell, but during what was scheduled to be a plea hearing, the trial court declared that it would allow Spruell to withdraw from representing Walley after Spruell stated to the court that he did not believe that it was in Walley’s best interest to plead guilty, and after Walley told the court that Spruell had not conveyed to him any plea offer from the State that included a recommendation that Walley be sentenced to serve five years in prison. Walley was tried before a jury with new counsel, Charles Haldi, and convicted on both counts; he subsequently received a sentence totaling twenty years, of which 15 were to be served in prison, with the remainder to be served on probation. After trial, Walley was represented by Brian Steel, who raised various issues in an amended motion for new trial, which was denied. One issue raised was that Spruell failed to convey the plea offer to Walley, a claim he withdrew during the hearing on the amended motion. In 2013, Walley petitioned for habeas relief, alleging ineffective assistance on Steel’s part in that Steel abandoned a claim that Walley had been afforded ineffective assistance by Spruell, which claim was based on Walley’s assertion that Spruell did not communicate the five-year plea offer. The Supreme Court reversed. "[W]hile part of Walley’s burden in the habeas court included showing that trial counsel failed to convey the plea offer, and was ineffective in doing so, those deficiencies alone do not demonstrate that appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to pursue a claim based upon trial counsel’s performance. [. . .] on the question of Steel’s abandoning any claim of ineffective assistance on Spruell’s part in failing to convey the plea offer, it was Walley’s burden in the habeas court to overcome the presumption that Steel’s decision not to pursue such a ground was reasonable, and instead show that this 'decision was an unreasonable one which only an incompetent attorney would adopt.' And this Walley simply failed to do." View "Hooks v. Walley" on Justia Law