Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Ashley Strozier appealed her conviction for felony murder for the 2008 stabbing death of James Laster. Strozier argued the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. But after review of the evidence entered into the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court was satisfied the jury could have found she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and the jury was authorized to disbelieve her version of events. View "Strozier v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Desmond Barnes was tried by jury and convicted of the 2011 murder of Jack Beasley, Jr. Barnes appealed the denial of his motion for a new trial, arguing he received ineffective assistance when his trial counsel: made an inflammatory statement during cross-examination of one of the State's witnesses; failed to secure a jury charge on mutual combat; and failed to move to dismiss the jury panel when a potential juror made a prejudicial statement. In addition, Barnes argued the trial court erred in not granting his objection to the court's instruction on malice murder. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Barnes' conviction. View "Barnes v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Warden Kathleen Kennedy challenged a habeas court’s order setting aside Deborah Hines’s convictions and sentences for four counts of identity fraud. In its order, the habeas court determined that the trial court improperly participated in the plea process such that Hines’s plea was involuntary and violated due process. Having reviewed the record, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded the habeas court erred by placing the burden of proving that Hines’s guilty plea was voluntary, knowing, or intelligent on the Warden, the habeas respondent, and further erred by concluding that the trial court’s comments at the hearing rendered Hines’s plea involuntary. The Supreme Court therefore reversed the habeas court’s order. View "Kennedy v. Hines" on Justia Law

Joseph Jordan was tried by jury and convicted of murder and other crimes in connection with the 2011 fatal shooting of Johnny Luckey. On appeal, Jordan argued he was entitled to a mistrial after the prosecuting attorney accused his lawyer of trying to deceive the jury, and he also claimed he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his lawyer was absent from the courtroom during a critical stage of the trial. Finding no reversible error after review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Jordan's conviction. View "Jordan v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Jovan Thompson was found guilty by jury of felony murder and related crimes in connection with the shooting death of his pregnant girlfriend, Sarhonica Thrasher. Thompson appealed, contending the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the verdict and that the trial court made evidentiary and charging errors. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Thompson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In June 2002, Appellant Steve McDonald was found guilty of malice murder, three counts of felony murder, armed robbery, false imprisonment, theft by taking, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. After his motion for new trial was denied, McDonald obtained new counsel and appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court, alleging numerous grounds for reversal. Finding no reversible error, the Court affirmed McDonald’s convictions, but vacated his sentence “to the extent that it ‘merged’ the felony murder, armed robbery, theft by taking, and false imprisonment verdicts into the malice murder verdict.” In 2017, the trial court conducted a resentencing hearing. McDonald presented no evidence during the hearing, and made no argument suggesting that the Supreme Court’s sentencing instructions were erroneous. During the hearing, the trial court merged the theft by taking count into the armed robbery count and further resentenced McDonald to: life imprisonment for armed robbery to run consecutive to malice murder, and ten years for false imprisonment to run concurrent to the armed robbery. McDonald appealed the new sentencing order, contending that the trial court erred “in issuing additional sentences because the order issued by the Supreme Court directing it to do so was in error.” Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "McDonald v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Christian de la Hernandez was convicted of malice murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault, kidnapping with bodily injury, and rape in connection with the shooting death of Jacqueline Ramon. On appeal, Hernandez contended only that venue did not properly lie in DeKalb County. The record reflected that although there was undisputed evidence establishing that the events leading up to Ramon’s murder occurred in DeKalb County, witness B.M. was not certain what county she and Ramon were being driven in when Hernandez shot Ramon. After the incident, B.M. returned to the area with an investigator from the DeKalb County District Attorney’s Office, who drove B.M. along the route she had been driven on the night of Ramon’s murder. At one point, B.M. pointed the investigator in the direction of Interstate 75 South where it splits from I-85 South and said that she thought she remembered passing Exit 227 near the time of the shooting. However, Exit 227 could only be accessed by cars traveling northbound on I-75, and when B.M. and the investigator drove to it, B.M. was unable to say if the shooting occurred there. She further stated that she “remembered some numbers 226 or 228, that’s all I remembered.” Then at trial, when asked where they were when Hernandez shot Ramon, B.M. testified that: “I only knew that we were in 85 South. I didn’t know where we were at all.” The Georgia Supreme Court concluded that because it was not readily determinable where Hernandez shot and killed Ramon, OCGA 17-2-2(c) applied, and the State properly established venue in DaKalb County, where Ramon's body was found. Therefore, venue was proper in DeKalb County. View "de la Hernandez v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Charles Richardson was convicted of murder and associated offenses arising out of the 2008 shooting death of Kyle Jennings. Appellant challenged his convictions on grounds that he received ineffective assistance of counsel; finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Richardson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2012, Richard Ringold pled guilty to four counts of murder, one count of aggravated assault, and five counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, arising out of the shooting deaths of four victims and the wounding of a fifth. Ringold was sentenced to concurrent terms of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for each murder and terms of years on the other convictions. Approximately one month later, he moved to withdraw his plea, and his motion was denied after a hearing. Nearly four years later, he moved to file an out-of-time appeal, which the trial court denied summarily and without holding a hearing. Proceeding pro se, he appealed that denial, asserting that both the trial court and his motion-to-withdraw counsel erred by failing to advise him of his right to appeal the denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The Georgia Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s order denying Ringold’s motion for an out-of-time appeal and remand this case for the trial court to determine whether Ringold’s motion-to-withdraw counsel was ineffective in failing to file a timely notice of appeal, consistent with the test in Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U. S. 470 (2000). If Ringold could show his counsel was deficient in failing to file a timely notice of appeal and that, but for counsel’s deficiency, he would have appealed, he was entitled to an out-of-time appeal. View "Ringold v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Rocquel Chavers was convicted of malice murder, violation of the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in connection with the shooting death of Jasperin Armstrong. On appeal, Chavers argued the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction of the Street Gang Act, the trial court erred in allowing certain testimony over a hearsay objection, and that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to certain other testimony as hearsay. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Chavers v. Georgia" on Justia Law