Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Charmon Sinkfield was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2009 shooting death of Vernon Forrest. On appeal, Sinkfield contended the trial court erred when it denied his pretrial challenge to Fulton County’s master jury list and that the “death qualification” process resulted in a jury that violated his fair cross-section rights under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Seeing no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Sinkfield v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Derain Waller was convicted of felony murder and other crimes in connection with the 2016 shooting death of Demonde Dicks, Jr. On appeal, Appellant contended the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions generally and his conviction for armed robbery specifically, and that the trial court erred in sentencing him on the armed robbery and felony murder counts. The Georgia Supreme Court vacated Appellant’s conviction for armed robbery because that conviction should have merged into the felony murder count for sentencing purposed. Otherwise, the Supreme Court found no other error and affirmed in all other respects. View "Waller v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Letisha McClain appealed a trial court’s denial of her motion to withdraw her guilty pleas to felony murder and three counts of aggravated assault. She claimed the trial court erred in denying her motion because withdrawal of her pleas was necessary to correct a manifest injustice. The Georgia Supreme Court found McClain showed no obvious abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of her motion to withdraw her guilty pleas, so it affirmed. View "McClain v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Simeon Moore and Walter Milbourne challenged their convictions for malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2014 shooting of Jamie Milton and the shooting death of Milton’s girlfriend, Jamie Moore (“Jamie”). Moore contended the evidence presented at trial was legally insufficient to show that he shared responsibility for Jamie’s death and that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to a conflict of interest. Milbourne contended the trial court violated the continuing witness rule by sending a PowerPoint presentation created by the lead detective that summarized the admitted cell phone evidence out with the jury during deliberations, and erred in granting a request by the media to film closing arguments over his objection. Milbourne also contended his motion for new trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective. Finding no reversible error in either case, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Moore v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2012, Waseem Daker was found guilty of malice murder and other crimes. Daker had hired or was appointed four attorneys, all of whom were allowed to withdraw before or near the beginning of the trial; he ultimately elected to expressly waive his right to counsel so that he could represent himself. After Daker was convicted, he repeatedly asked for appellate counsel to be appointed to represent him, but those requests were denied, so he had to continue to represent himself. His pro se motion for new trial was denied, and his pro se direct appeal resulted in his convictions being affirmed. In 2017, Daker filed a petition for habeas corpus asserting 438 grounds for relief, all of which the habeas court denied. In his application to the Georgia Supreme Court for a certificate of probable cause to appeal, Daker claimed only that the trial court denied his constitutional right to appellate counsel, and that his requests for a determination of his indigency status for purposes of having counsel appointed were improperly delegated to and denied by the circuit public defender’s office. In 2019, the Supreme Court granted Daker’s application, vacated the habeas court’s order with regard to the two claims that Daker had raised in his application, and remanded for further proceedings. In 2020, the habeas court entered a new final order, summarily concluding Daker's 438 grounds were “without merit.” However, the habeas court concluded that “[t]he record does not show that [Daker] voluntarily waived the right to counsel on appeal as required” and that the trial court erred in ruling that Daker was not indigent for purposes of his post-conviction proceedings. Despite these specific conclusions, the habeas court remanded the case to the trial court to determine if Daker was entitled to appellate counsel, but denied the habeas petition. Warden Marty Allen appealed the habeas court’s order, arguing it was error to remand the case to the trial court and that the Supreme Court should remand the case to the habeas court to determine if Daker was entitled to appellate counsel. In a cross-appeal, Daker argued that the habeas court erred by not granting him a new direct appeal based on the improper denial of his constitutional right to appellate counsel; he asked the Supreme Court to decide that claim without a remand to the habeas court. The Supreme Court found the habeas court correctly concluded Daker did not validly waive his right to appellate counsel. The habeas court’s order was reversed to the extent that it summarily and inconsistently said Daker’s right-to-counsel claim was meritless or needed to be remanded to the trial court, then purported to deny the habeas petition as a whole. The case was remanded to the habeas court with direction to grant relief to Daker in the form of a second, out-of-time direct appeal so that he could start the post-conviction process anew in the trial court. View "Allen v. Daker (and vice versa)" on Justia Law

Appellant Emerson Abbott was tried by jury and found guilty of murder and numerous other crimes arising from the 2015 shooting deaths of James and Myra Reeves. On appeal, Appellant contended the trial court erred in allowing a witness to testify at trial while under the influence of alcohol and in admitting evidence of a prior act of theft. Appellant also contended the State failed to disclose an agreement with a testifying witness, in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 (1963). Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Abbott v. Georgia" on Justia Law

James Stewart was convicted by jury of felony murder and aggravated assault in the shooting death of his girlfriend, Wendy Johnson. Stewart contended on appeal that the trial court committed plain error in giving an improper sequential verdict form to the jury and that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the verdict form. In addition, Stewart contended his sentence for aggravated assault (life without parole) was illegal. The Georgia Supreme Court found that because the crime charged in Count 3, aggravated assault by shooting Johnson with a gun, was the predicate felony for the charge of felony murder in Count 2, the aggravated assault conviction merged with the felony murder conviction for sentencing purposes. The trial court therefore erred in sentencing Stewart on Count 3, and the judgment was vacated in part to correct the merger error. View "Stewart v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Lernard Bonner appealed his conviction for felony murder in connection with the shooting death of Lekeshia Moses. On appeal, Bonner contended the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that the trial court erred by failing to charge the jury on accident. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Bonner v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Alpherd Jones was convicted of felony murder in connection with the beating death of his girlfriend, LaShanda January. On appeal, he contended the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to support his conviction and that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of January’s diary entries under OCGA 24-8-807 and by admitting other-act evidence under OCGA 24-4-404 (b). Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Jones v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Sergio Moon was tried by jury and convicted of felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Linda Flint, the great-grandmother of his children. Moon argued on appeal: (1) the trial court erred when it denied his request to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter; (2) the evidence presented at trial did not show that Moon’s felonious conduct was “inherently dangerous,” and as a result, his felonious conduct could not serve as a predicate for felony murder; (3) the prosecutor made an improper argument at closing; and (4) the evidence was insufficient to support his felony murder conviction. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Moon v. Georgia" on Justia Law