Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

In November 2015, appellee Paul Hamilton was indicted for the malice murder of Brandon Lay, the felony murder of Lay predicated on aggravated assault, and the aggravated assaults of Lay, Teddi Taylor, and Judy Hewatt. In October 2018, a jury found Hamilton not guilty of malice murder but guilty of the remaining crimes. The trial court, on its own motion, granted Hamilton a new trial on general and legal grounds. The State appealed. Having reviewed the entire record, and considering that the trial court was authorized, as the thirteenth juror, to discount Taylor’s and Hewatt’s testimony and to credit Hamilton’s story, and bearing in mind the standard of review set forth in OCGA 5-5-50, the Georgia Supreme Court could not say the trial court’s conclusion was an abuse of its substantial discretion to grant Hamilton a new trial. Therefore, it affirmed the trial court judgment. View "Georgia v. Hamilton" on Justia Law

Appellant Tamaron Varner was convicted of malice murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in connection with the shooting death of Joshua Deberry. On appeal, he argued the trial court erred by denying his motion to exclude a police body-camera recording that depicted Deberry just after the shooting and that recorded the statements made by Deberry and his fiancée to the police. Appellant also contended his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing: (1) to challenge the admission of certain statements in the recording; (2) to specially demur to the firearm-related charges in his indictment; (3) to object to the prosecutor’s argument that he was presenting mutually exclusive defenses; and (4) to challenge the admission of evidence of a shotgun that had no connection to the charged crimes. Having reviewed the record and the briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no error, and affirmed. View "Varner v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Delwoun Williams was convicted of felony murder and other crimes in connection with the 2017 shooting death of Cornelius Gordon. On appeal, Appellant argued the trial court erred in denying his request to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter. After review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded this contention was without merit and affirmed. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2009, Bridgette Hines was convicted of armed robbery and other crimes in connection with the robbery of a convenience store, and she was sentenced to imprisonment for 20 years. Her convictions were affirmed on appeal. Then, in 2017, Hines filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that she was denied the effective assistance of counsel on appeal. The habeas court agreed with Hines and set aside her convictions. The Warden appealed. The evidence presented at her trial shows that Hines, Geoffrey Jupiter, and Ricky Timmons were involved in the robbery. Hines and Jupiter were tried together, and Timmons testified against them. Timmons had agreed to testify for the prosecution as a part of a plea deal that allowed Timmons to plead guilty to simple robbery and avoid prosecution for the greater offense of armed robbery. Hines argued that her trial counsel failed to cross-examine Timmons about the fact that he faced a potential life sentence for armed robbery with no parole eligibility for 30 years, but for his deal in which the State agreed that he could plead guilty only to simple robbery and testify against Hines (and Jupiter). This failure to impeach Timmons, Hines argued, was the basis for a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel that her appellate counsel should have raised on direct appeal. Because her appellate counsel raised no such claim, she concluded she was denied the effective assistance of counsel on appeal. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded Hines has failed to show ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, "Even if Hines could have shown that her trial counsel acted deficiently in failing to impeach Timmons on this particular issue, she likely would not have been able to show prejudice." The Court reversed the habeas court's judgment granting relief. View "Benton v. Hines" on Justia Law

Linda Cowen, a Clayton County State Court judge since December 1995, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, in which she sought, among other things, over $120,000 in back pay from Clayton County and several of its county commissioners1 for allegedly violating Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VII, Par. V. Cowen claimed that the County had been improperly calculating her compensation under County Ordinance 30-4 (the “Supplemental Ordinance”) and Local Law 2006 Ga. Laws 926 passed by the General Assembly (the “Local Law”), which, she alleged, resulted in an illegal reduction in her overall compensation each year between 2007 and 2017. She also alleged that, when the County repealed the Supplemental Ordinance effective December 20, 2016, the County, once again, illegally reduced her compensation in violation of Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VII, Par. V. The trial court rejected all of Cowen’s claims, concluding in part that: (1) Cowen’s mandamus action was barred by gross laches; (2) even if the mandamus action was not barred, it was subject to dismissal because mandamus was not an appropriate vehicle through which Cowen could seek her back pay; and (3) even if mandamus were an appropriate vehicle, the mandamus action was without merit. Cowen appealed. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded, after review, that: (1) some, but not all, of Cowen’s claims for back pay were time barred; and (2) the trial court erred in concluding that mandamus was not an appropriate vehicle here; but (3) the trial court properly denied the claim for mandamus. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Cowen v. Clayton County" on Justia Law

Kevin Jackson appeals his convictions for malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Timbaland Crowder. On appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court, Jackson argued the evidence was insufficient to convict him, the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial after a witness testified about Jackson’s Facebook and other social media posts, and the trial court plainly erred in instructing the jury on the charged crimes. He also argued he received ineffective assistance of counsel in several respects. The Supreme Court affirmed because the evidence was sufficient to support Jackson’s convictions, the trial court did not err in denying Jackson’s mistrial motion, the jury instructions were not plain error, and trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective. View "Jackson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Joseph Williams appeals his convictions for malice murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, all stemming from an argument in a convenience store parking lot. Antonio Felton was shot and killed the night of March 30, 2012. Williams argued the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for malice murder and that the trial court erred by issuing a sentence on the firearm possession count that was to run consecutively to the sentences on both of the other counts on which Williams was convicted. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded the evidence was sufficient to support Williams’s convictions. But because the record showed the trial court underestimated the breadth of its sentencing discretion, the Supreme Court vacated Williams’s sentence on the firearm possession count and remanded for resentencing. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2015, appellee Paul Hamilton was indicted for the malice murder of Brandon Lay, the felony murder of Lay predicated on aggravated assault, and the aggravated assaults of Lay, Teddi Taylor, and Judy Hewatt. In 2018, a jury found Hamilton not guilty of malice murder but guilty of the remaining crimes. On October 25, 2018, the trial court, on its own motion, granted Hamilton a new trial on general and legal grounds. The State appealed, contending the trial court erred in granting Hamilton a new trial on the general grounds because the trial court erred by applying the legal standard for the sufficiency of the evidence laid out in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979), instead of weighing the evidence as the thirteenth juror. The Georgia Supreme Court determined this contention was without merit and affirmed. Although the trial court did briefly mention the Jackson v. Virginia standard at the hearing at which it granted a new trial, it quickly followed that statement with the correct standard for the general grounds and by stating that it would grant a new trial based on those standards. Specifically, the court stated that it was “sitting as the 13th juror,” that the evidence “at trial was decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence,” and that “a new trial is consistent with the principles of equity and justice.” View "Georgia v. Hamilton" on Justia Law

Appellant Jason Bryant was convicted by jury of the malice murder of his wife, Angelina Bryant, the aggravated assault of Trina Nwoke, and making a terroristic threat. He appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence as to the offense of making a terroristic threat and contending that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. After review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court found the evidence was insufficient to support the terroristic threat charge, and reversed as to that count. The Court affirmed the remaining convictions. View "Bryant v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Anthony Lee was tried by jury and convicted of the murder of Dexter Butts and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. Lee appealed, contending that the State failed to present evidence legally sufficient to sustain his convictions, that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial, that the trial court erred when it admitted a statement that he gave to investigators, and that the trial court erred when it allowed the prosecution to impeach a defense witness with a pending indictment. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Supreme Court found no merit in these claims of error, and affirmed. View "Lee v. Georgia" on Justia Law