Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Jaramus Jackson was convicted of felony murder and a firearm offense in connection with the 2015 fatal shooting of Carlos Wallace. On appeal, he argued: (1) the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred by allowing the State to present evidence under OCGA 24-4- 404 (b) that Jackson had shot at someone else in 2005 and the trial court improperly instructed the jury on how to consider this evidence; (3) the trial court erred in failing to give various jury instructions and his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to ask for them; (4) the trial court erred by preventing the defense from cross examining accomplice witness Ronney Jackson about his 1997 arrest for murder, the State committed a Brady violation by failing to timely disclose the 1997 arrest, and trial counsel was ineffective in failing to question Ronney about the arrest and to object to the Brady violation; (5) trial counsel failed to convey the State’s proposed sentence recommendation if Jackson pled guilty; and (6) trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to certain questions asked during his cross-examination. Taking each contention in turn, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error. View "Jackson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Graham Williams was indicted by grand jury of distributing heroin and felony murder predicated upon the unlawful distribution of the heroin. Both charges arose out of the overdose death of Leslie Ivey. Six months after the indictment, the trial court dismissed it, concluding the evidence presented a pretrial hearing did not show Williams was, in fact, guilty of distributing heroin. The State appealed. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed and remanded this matter for trial. View "Georgia v. Williams" on Justia Law

Charmane Goins was convicted of malice murder in connection with the strangling death of Lauren Taylor. On appeal, Goins contended, among other things: (1) the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to support his conviction; and (2) his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated. The Georgia Supreme Court found the evidence was sufficient, but the trial court did not make the findings and conclusions regarding Goins’ speedy trial claim required for appellate review. The Supreme Court therefore vacated in part the trial court’s order denying Goins’ motion for new trial and remanded the case for the trial court to properly address the speedy trial claim. View "Goins v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Keith Dozier was convicted of malice murder, aggravated assault, and theft by taking in connection with the 2012 death of Gail Spencer. On appeal, he argued the trial court erred in sentencing him for felony theft by taking, failed to exercise its discretion when it sentenced Dozier to life without parole for the murder, erred when it recharged the jury on party to a crime, and erred in denying a motion to suppress his statement to police. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed all of Dozier’s convictions except for his conviction of felony theft by taking, which was reversed and remanded to the trial court with direction to enter a conviction and sentence for misdemeanor theft by taking under OCGA 16-8-2. View "Dozier v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Johnny Rigsby was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2010 shooting death of his girlfriend Betty Smith. Appellant argued on appeal that the trial court erred by failing to suppress his post-arrest statement to an investigator, that the jury instructions and verdict form regarding the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter were improper, and that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to timely object to the verdict form. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Rigsby v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Harvey Walker was convicted by jury of murder and related crimes in connection with the stabbing death of his ex-girlfriend, Kateria Benton. On appeal, he argued the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, and that the trial court erred in allowing improper testimony and evidence of prior bad acts to be admitted. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Walker v.Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2013, the State of Georgia indicted Blane Nordahl on three counts of burglary, four counts of first-degree burglary, and a single count of criminal attempt to commit burglary. The State notified Nordahl that it intended to seek recidivist punishment pursuant to OCGA 17-10-7 (a) and (c), based on his prior out-of-state and federal felony convictions. Nordahl entered a non-negotiated guilty plea to the Georgia charges in 2017, but he challenged the State’s request for recidivist punishment, arguing, inter alia, that his federal conviction for conspiracy to transport stolen goods in interstate commerce was not a crime that would be a felony if committed in Georgia. The trial court rejected Nordahl’s argument and sentenced him as a recidivist. The Georgia Supreme Court granted review in this case to consider whether the Court of Appeals erred in applying a “conduct” approach when analyzing whether a prior out-of-state or federal conviction is for a crime that would be a felony if committed in Georgia and would, therefore, support enhanced punishment under OCGA 17-10-7 (a) and (c). The Court determined the Court of Appeals’ “conduct” approach violated the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and had to be disapproved. Nevertheless, after applying the “elements-only” or “modified categorical” approach to analyzing the prior federal conviction used to support the recidivist sentence at issue in this appeal, the Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ judgment under the right-for-any-reason doctrine. View "Nordahl v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2013, a small business jet crashed into a Georgia Power Company transmission pole on Milliken & Company’s property near the Thomson-McDuffie Regional Airport in Thomson, Georgia. The two pilots were injured and the five passengers died. In the wake of the crash, the pilots and the families of the deceased passengers filed a total of seven lawsuits against multiple defendants, including Georgia Power and Milliken. The complaints in those seven suits alleged that a transmission pole located on Milliken’s property was negligently erected and maintained within the airport’s protected airspace. The record evidence showed Georgia Power constructed the transmission pole on Milliken’s property for the purpose of providing electricity to Milliken’s manufacturing-plant expansion, and that the pole was constructed pursuant to a 1989 Easement between Georgia Power and Milliken. In each of the seven suits, Milliken filed identical cross-claims against Georgia Power, alleging that Georgia Power was contractually obligated to indemnify Milliken “for all sums that Plaintiffs may recover from Milliken” under Paragraph 12 of the Easement. Georgia Power moved for summary judgment on the crossclaims, which were granted. The trial court reasoned Paragraph 12 of the Easement operated as a covenant not to sue, rather than as an indemnity agreement, because it “nowhere contains the word ‘indemnity’” and “it is not so comprehensive regarding protection from liability.” The Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment to six cases. Rather than adopt the trial court’s reasoning, the appellate court held that the provision was an indemnity agreement and affirmed the trial court by applying Georgia’s anti-indemnity statute, OCGA 13-8-2 (b), to determine that Paragraph 12 of the Easement was “void as against public policy,” a theory argued before the trial court but argued or briefed before the Court of Appeals. The Georgia Supreme Court determined the Court of Appeals erred in its construction and application of OCGA 13-8-2(b), vacated the judgment and remanded for the lower court to consider whether, in the first instance, the trial court’s rationale for granting Georgia Power’s motions for summary judgment and any other arguments properly before the Court of Appeals. View "Milliken & Co. v. Georgia Power Co." on Justia Law

Gregory Adams was tried by jury and found guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol to the extent that he was less safe to drive, failure to maintain lane, and following too closely. He appealed, claiming the trial court erred in admitting evidence regarding a stipulation in an administrative license suspension hearing pursuant to OCGA 40-5-67.1 and evidence of a 2011 arrest for DUI. The Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. While the Georgia Supreme Court did not agree with all that was stated in the Court of Appeals’ opinion, it nevertheless concluded Adams affirmatively waived the first claim and failed to demonstrate error with respect to the second claim. Therefore, the Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals. View "Adams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Phillip Bailey appealed the denial of his motion for leave to pursue an out-of-time appeal. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Bailey pleaded guilty in 2007 to the murder of Jess Sharp and an aggravated assault upon Lamar Sharp, for which Bailey was sentenced to imprisonment for life for the murder and a concurrent term of imprisonment for 20 years for the aggravated assault. He did not bring a timely appeal from the judgment of conviction entered upon his plea. More than eleven years later, Bailey filed a motion for leave to pursue an out-of-time appeal. In his motion, Bailey alleged, among other things, that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel in connection with his plea and that his plea was involuntary. Bailey did not allege, however, that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel in connection with his failure to bring a timely appeal. Nor did he allege that his failure to bring a timely appeal was attributable to any other error of constitutional magnitude. The trial court denied his motion without an evidentiary hearing. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded after review of the trial record, that the trial court was right to deny the motion. View "Bailey v. Georgia" on Justia Law