Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Dearies Favors appealed the denial of his motion for new trial after a jury found him guilty of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the October 2012 death of Demarcus Booker. Favors argued the trial court abused its discretion by admitting, over Favors’ objection, a photograph showing Booker after he had been shot because the photograph was unnecessarily graphic and because it did not accurately depict the crime scene. Additionally, Favors argued the trial court abused its discretion by denying Favors’ request to immediately issue a jury charge regarding sympathy when one of the State’s witnesses became emotional during his trial testimony. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Favors' convictions. View "Favors v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Georgia Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal in this case to address Joseph Park's challenge to the constitutionality of OCGA 42-1-14, which required among other things, that a person classified as a sexually dangerous predator, but who is no longer in State custody or on probation or parole, wear and pay for a GPS monitoring device that allows the State to monitor that individual’s location “for the remainder of his or her natural life.” The Court concluded OCGA § 42-1-14 (e), on its face, authorized a patently unreasonable search that ran afoul of the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. As a result, subsection (e) of the statute was stricken as unconstitutional. View "Park v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Aaron Overton appealed his convictions related to the shooting death of Steve McQuire. Appellant alleged on appeal the trial court erred when it failed to give charges related to involuntary manslaughter. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Overton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2003, a jury found Willie Chambers guilty of armed robbery, four counts of kidnapping, five counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. He was sentenced to serve 20 years in prison for armed robbery; 20 years for each count of kidnapping, concurrent to each other but consecutive to the armed robbery sentence; 10 years for each count of aggravated assault, concurrent with all the other counts; and five years on probation for firearm possession, consecutive to all the other counts. The Georgia Supreme Court granted Chambers' application for a certificate of probable cause to appeal the denial of his petition for habeas relief to address: (1) whether the habeas court erred in concluding there was sufficient evidence of asportation (of the victim) to support the kidnapping charge; and (2) whether the aggravated assault charge merged into the armed robbery count. The Supreme Court determined the habeas court failed to recognize the merger of the latter counts, and set aside the conviction for aggravated assault. The Court remanded for resentencing, leaving intact the other convictions and sentences. View "Chambers v. Hall" on Justia Law

Brandon Pate was convicted in 2010 of statutory rape, aggravated assault, and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 20 years for the statutory rape, a consecutive term of probation for 20 years for the aggravated assault, and a consecutive term of probation for five years for the possession of a knife. In 2013, Pate filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging his sentence. The habeas court concluded that his sentence was unlawful in several respects and issued the writ. The Warden appealed. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded after review that Pate’s sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment for statutory rape "does not meet even the threshold inference of gross disproportionality," and so, despite his young age, "his sentence for statutory rape must stand." View "Conley v. Pate" on Justia Law

In December 2017, the City of Atlanta enacted an ordinance to annex certain property that lies within the Fulton County Industrial District. Fulton County filed a lawsuit for declaratory and injunctive relief against the City and several of its officers, asserting that the annexation of property within the District was prohibited by a local constitutional amendment ratified in 1979. In response, the City argued that the 1979 amendment was never constitutionally adopted, that it was repealed in any event by the adoption of the Constitution of 1983, and that local laws purporting to continue the amendment are themselves unconstitutional. The trial court agreed, and it held, among other things, that the 1979 amendment was enacted in violation of the constitutional “single subject” rule. See Ga. Const. of 1976, Art. XII, Sec. I, Par. I. The County appealed, but finding no error in the trial court's judgment, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Fulton County v. City of Atlanta" on Justia Law

In 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed appellant Curtis Tyner’s 1984 conviction pursuant to a guilty plea for malice murder in connection with the death of Martha Mickel. Following a trial, Tyner was again convicted of malice murder and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, Tyner contended that the trial court erred in allowing certain statements made by Mickel to be admitted at trial under the residual hearsay exception contained in OCGA 24-8-807; that the trial court erred in allowing certain out-of-court statements of investigating officers to be admitted at trial; that the trial court erred in admitting evidence related to the robbery-by-force charge; and that the trial court erred in merging the felony murder count with the malice murder count rather than vacating the felony murder count (the felony murder counts were vacated as a matter of law). Finding the remaining challenges to be without merit, the Supreme Court affirmed Tyner's second conviction. View "McCord v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2011, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed appellant Curtis Tyner’s 1984 conviction pursuant to a guilty plea for malice murder in connection with the death of Martha Mickel. Following a trial, Tyner was again convicted of malice murder and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, Tyner contended that the trial court erred in allowing certain statements made by Mickel to be admitted at trial under the residual hearsay exception contained in OCGA 24-8-807; that the trial court erred in allowing certain out-of-court statements of investigating officers to be admitted at trial; that the trial court erred in admitting evidence related to the robbery-by-force charge; and that the trial court erred in merging the felony murder count with the malice murder count rather than vacating the felony murder count (the felony murder counts were vacated as a matter of law). Finding the remaining challenges to be without merit, the Supreme Court affirmed Tyner's second conviction. View "Tyner v. Georgia" on Justia Law

This case stemmed from a dispute between homeowners James and Mary Hanham and Access Management Group L.P., the management agent for the St. Marlo Homeowner’s Association. In 2011, the Hanhams filed claims for trespass, nuisance, negligence, invasion of privacy and breach of contract against their neighbor Marie Berthe-Narchet (“Narchet”), her landscaper GreenMaster Landscaping Service, Inc., and Access Management in response to a landscaping project on Narchet’s property that resulted in flooding to the Hanhams’ property and restricted their view of the golf course. During a 2016 jury trial, Access Management moved for a directed verdict on the negligence and breach of contract claims; the trial court denied both motions. The jury subsequently found in favor of the Hanhams, and Access Management appealed to the Court of Appeals, alleging, among other things, that the trial court erred in denying its motion for a directed verdict as to the Hanhams’ breach of contract claim. The Court of Appeals agreed and reversed the jury’s judgment as to that claim. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial court’s denial of Access Management’s motion for a directed verdict as to the Hanhams’ breach of contract claim. The Supreme Court concluded the Court of Appeals’ decision was in error, and reversed the judgment as it pertained to the breach of contract claim. The Court vacated the final division of the Court of Appeals’ opinion, and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for further consideration. View "Hanham v. Access Management Group, L.P." on Justia Law

In the early stages of the underlying lawsuit, the trial court struck fifteen paragraphs from plaintiff's complaint pursuant to OCGA 9-11-12 (f), but the Court of Appeals reversed most of that order. The Georgia Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari to address how a trial court should evaluate a party’s section 9-11-12 (f) motion to strike matter from a pleading on the ground that it is “scandalous.” Because the trial court in this case did not properly evaluate the defendants’ motion to strike, and because that court should have the opportunity to properly exercise its discretion regarding the motion, the Supreme Court vacated the Court of Appeals' judgment in part and remanded with direction to vacate the trial court order and remand the case to the trial court for further analysis. View "Chappius v. Ortho Sport & Spine Physicians Savannah, LLC" on Justia Law