Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Darius Virger and Alexis Cave were tried together for crimes related to the beating and death of Diarra Chappell, a 13-month-old child who lived with them. Virger was convicted of malice murder, Cave was convicted of felony murder, and both were convicted of other offenses. On appeal, both Virger and Cave challenged the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting some of their convictions and contended the trial court erred by not severing their cases for trial. Virger also contended the trial court erred by failing to strike a juror for cause, by physically separating the co-defendants during their trial, and by overruling several of his evidentiary objections. Cave argued the trial court erred by allowing the admission of impermissible character evidence, by excluding expert testimony about her mental condition, and by denying her motion for a continuance. In its review of the record, the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error, so it affirmed the convictions in both cases. View "Virger v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Morgan County, Georgia appealed a trial court’s order dismissing Christine May’s criminal citation for violating the County’s amended zoning ordinance by renting out her house near Lake Oconee for a week. The court concluded that the zoning ordinance in effect at the time May began renting her house for short periods was unconstitutionally vague as applied, meaning that her use of the house for such rentals was “grandfathered” and not subject to the amended ordinance’s explicit prohibition of short-term rentals for fewer than 30 days. May cross-appealed, but the Georgia Supreme Court did not address her claimed errors, because it affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of her citation. View "Morgan County v. May" on Justia Law

Appellant Shuntae Battle was convicted of malice murder, aggravated assault, and first-degree cruelty to children in connection with the death of her three-year-old daughter, Jazmine Jenkins. Appellant argued on appeal of her conviction: (1) the evidence presented at her trial was insufficient to support the malice murder and cruelty to children convictions; (2) her right to due process was violated because the prosecutor’s arguments about her credibility and culpability at her trial differed from the prosecutor’s arguments at her co-indictee Juan Johnson’s prior trial; and (3) the prosecutor’s incorrect statements of the law during closing argument require reversal. Finding no merit to these contentions, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed her convictions for malice murder and cruelty to children, but vacated her conviction for aggravated assault, because that count should have merged into the malice murder conviction. View "Battle v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Frank Miller appealed his convictions for malice murder, two counts of aggravated assault, and two counts of false imprisonment in connection with the shooting death of his daughter, Colleen Miller Grant, and an attack on Grant’s grandson, Sawyer Dockery. Miller challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to convict him of the aggravated assault of Dockery and both counts of false imprisonment. Miller also argued his conviction for the aggravated assault of Grant should have merged with his conviction for the malice murder of Grant and that the defective indictment violated his due process rights. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the challenge to the indictment was not preserved, his conviction for the aggravated assault of Grant did not merge with the malice murder conviction, and the evidence was sufficient to support all of Miller’s convictions except the two counts of false imprisonment. As such, the Court reversed Miller’s convictions for false imprisonment, and affirmed on all other counts. View "Miller v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In April 2015, appellant Douglas Goodson was convicted of felony murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony related to the 2012 shooting death of his cousin Rodney Worley. Goodson appealed, asserting that the evidence was insufficient to convict and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Goodson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Raemon Moore was convicted of malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the 2012 shooting death of Asiel Parker. On appeal, he contended his convictions should be reversed because the trial court erred in admitting into evidence video recordings without proper authentication and because his trial counsel was ineffective. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Moore v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Dameino Roberts was convicted of felony murder during the commission of an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime in connection with the shooting death of Jhalil King. On appeal, Roberts argued the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions, that the trial court erred by excluding certain testimony and by expressing an opinion on certain evidence in violation of OCGA 17-8-57, and that Roberts was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Roberts v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellee John Johnson was tried by jury and found guilty for the shooting death of Brandon Scott. However, the trial court granted Johnson's motion for a new trial. At issue in this appeal is whether the trial court should have given an unrequested jury instruction on accomplice corroboration. The State argued a new trial should not have been granted because an instruction on accomplice corroboration was not clearly required where a witness other than the accomplice introduces an accomplice’s statement implicating a defendant’s guilt. In response, Johnson argued a new trial was warranted because the testimony of his alleged accomplice was the only evidence establishing Johnson’s participation in the crime, and, thus, the trial court plainly erred in failing to instruct the jury that accomplice testimony required corroboration. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed the trial court should have instructed the jury on accomplice corroboration and affirmed the grant of a new trial. View "Georgia v. Johnson" on Justia Law

Appellant Marquavis Benton was convicted of murder and related offenses arising out of the 2014 shooting death of Brian Whitfield. On appeal, Benton argued the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for malice murder and armed robbery and that the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter. Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Benton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Jason Wyno challenged the constitutionality of former OCGA 4-8-30, a portion of the Responsible Dog Ownership Law which purported to exempt local governments and their employees from liability arising from their enforcement of, or failure to enforce, that law and local dog-control ordinances. In 2011, Misty Wyno was attacked and killed by a dog owned by one of her neighbors. In the years leading up to the attack, numerous complaints about dogs at the neighbor’s address had been filed with the Lowndes County Animal Control office. Following Misty Wyno’s death, Jason Wyno brought a wrongful death action against the dog’s owners, Lowndes County, and four individual Lowndes County Animal Control employees, alleging the County and its employees negligently failed to perform ministerial duties negligently failed to provide police protection, negligently created and failed to abate a nuisance, were negligent in their control of allegedly dangerous dogs, and were negligent per se by violating several provisions of the Lowndes County Animal Control Ordinance. The complaint also made a demand for punitive damages and alleged that Lowndes County and the County Employees “acted with actual malice and/or an intent to injure in repeatedly refusing to investigate or take any action with regards to the dangerous dogs[.]” The case was dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds. Wyno argued the statute impermissibly extended the official immunity of local government employees provided in Article I, Section II, Paragraph IX (d) of the Georgia Constitution of 1983 because former OCGA 4-8-30 was not “a State Tort Claims Act.” The Georgia Supreme Court did not reach the constitutional question in this case because the Court found the trial court erred in its preliminary determination that the relevant duties imposed by the Responsible Dog Ownership Law and the Lowndes County Animal Control Ordinance in effect at the time of the incident giving rise to this suit were ministerial in nature. Instead, the Court found the relevant acts of the County Employees were discretionary. Moreover, because the record did not contain evidence the individual defendants acted with malice or intent to injure, they were protected from Wyno’s lawsuit by the official immunity provided by Paragraph IX (d). The Court therefore affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants, although for reasons different than relied upon by the trial court. View "Wyno v. Lowndes County" on Justia Law