Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Troy Davis, Jr. appealed his conviction for the malice murders of his aunt and uncle. He argued he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Finding no violation of Davis' constitutional rights, the Supreme Court affirmed his conviction. View "Davis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Husband and wife were divorced in 2012. Several months later, the wife filed a petition for contempt, alleging the husband failed to turn over certain jewelry she claimed should have been divided pursuant to the parties' divorce decree. The husband counterclaimed for contempt, arguing that the wife failed to comply with the decree's parenting and visitation provisions, and failed to reimburse him for repairs to the marital home. The trial court refused to hold either party in contempt. Acknowledging husband's admission that he already had sold some of the items he was supposed to return, the court further ordered that "[i]n the event [husband] is unable to return all pieces of jewelry, but returns selective items, said items shall be appraised by a mutually agreed upon certified appraiser and the amount of the appraisal shall be subtracted from the amount [husband] owes ($40,000) to [wife] for reimbursement of the jewelry." The court also directed the parties to submit a list of disputed expenses for repairs to the marital home. On appeal, the husband argued the trial court's order directing him to return the jewelry and for an accounting of the repairs constituted an improper modification of the parties' divorce decree. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court's decision with regard to the withholding of the husband's share of the net proceeds of the sold jewelry until he returned the jewelry to the wife or provided her adequate compensation: "[a]lthough the trial court had broad authority to enforce and seek compliance with it original decree ... it could not do so by imposing upon husband a pre-condition to hie receipt of the net proceeds that did not exist in the original decree." The Court affirmed the trial court in all other respects. View "Doritis v. Doritis" on Justia Law

Appellant Franklin Benson appealed his convictions for malice murder and other crimes relating to the death of Leslyan Williams. On appeal, he argued: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred in closing the courtroom during voir dire; and (3) that his trial counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance. The Supreme Court found appellant's claims of error were without merit, and accordingly affirmed appellant's convictions. View "Benson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The testator's daughter challenges the propounder's petition to probate a copy of the testator's will. The Probate Court found that the propounder was unable to overcome the presumption that the testator intended to revoke the will created when the original will could not be found. Because there was evidence supporting the probate court's finding, the Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the petition to probate. View "Britt v. Sands" on Justia Law

Appellant Shawn Currier appealed his convictions for felony murder and related crimes stemming from the death of David Buriles. Among other errors, appellant largely challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him at trial. Finding no reversible error or abuse of the trial court's discretion, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's convictions. View "Currier v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In March 2010, Justyna Kunz was involved in a car accident with GEICO's insureds, Crystal, Joseph, and Elizabeth Kalish. Kunz received medical treatment at Athens Regional Medical Center; the Hospital Authority of Clarke County and Athens Regional Medical Center (collectively, "the Hospitals") filed three hospital liens. Kunz subsequently filed suit against the Kalishes. Kunz's attorney wrote a letter to the Kalishes' attorney accepting their $100,000 policy limit settlement offer. The settlement documents, signed in Fall 2010, expressly required Kunz to satisfy the hospital liens out of the settlement fund and constituted a "general[ ] release ... from all legal and equitable claims of every kind and nature." The liens were never satisfied. The Court of Appeals held that, under OCGA 44–14–473 (a), the Hospitals were barred by a one-year statute of limitations from filing suit against GEICO to collect on the hospital liens. The Hospitals appealed the appellate court's decision. Finding that the appellate court erred in arriving at its conclusion, the Supreme Court reversed. View "Hospital Authority of Clarke County v. GEICO General Insurance Co." on Justia Law

Following a jury trial, Michael Moore was found guilty of malice murder, felony murder, attempt to commit a violation of the Georgia Controlled Substances Act, and various other offenses in connection with the shooting death of Leo Fletcher during a drug deal. On appeal, he argued that his trial counsel was ineffective. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Moore v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following a jury trial, Justin Moore was found guilty of felony murder and various other offenses in connection with the shooting death of Brandon Thomas. On appeal, he argued the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial and that his trial counsel was ineffective. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Moore v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Kenneth Victor Ramirez was convicted of the murder of Thomas Branch. He appealed the conviction, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded the evidence was legally sufficient and therefore affirmed Ramirez's conviction. View "Ramirez v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following a jury trial, Tony Van was found guilty of murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. He appealed, arguing that the trial court gave the jury coercive instructions regarding the completion of the verdict form which favored a conviction and that the verdict form was improper. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Van's conviction. View "Van v. Georgia" on Justia Law