Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

by
Willie Winters III appealed his conviction for felony murder in connection with the 1987 shooting death of Stephen Jones. Winters argued: (1) the evidence was insufficient to convict him of felony murder and the trial court erred by (2) admitting a witness’s post-hypnotic statement and (3) failing to admit a section of a GBI report as a public record under OCGA 24-8-803 (8) (C). Winters also argued he received constitutionally ineffective assistance by (4) relying on an alleged unwritten stipulation to admit a section of the GBI report and (5) failing to move for either a mistrial or a continuance when it became clear the report would not be admitted. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Winters' conviction. View "Winters v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
In 2011, Terrance Beasley was found guilty of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime in connection with the 1998 shooting death of Rodriquez Hamm. Beasley appealed the denial of his amended motion for new trial, arguing: (1) his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the prosecutor allegedly violated Mallory v. State, 409 SE2d 839 (1991), by commenting on his silence; (2) the trial court erred when it instructed the jury on the defense of habitation or, alternatively, that his counsel was ineffective for failing to maintain his objection to the defense of habitation instruction after the charge was given; and (3) his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the trial court’s alleged closure of the courtroom, thus violating his constitutional right to a public trial. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Beasley's conviction. View "Beasley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Andrea Elliott was prosecuted for DUI. When Elliott was arrested, she refused to submit to a breath test. Georgia statutes allowed the State to use her refusal against her in her criminal trial, and the State has sought to do that. The United States Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution did not bar the State from using such a refusal, in part because the Fifth Amendment gave Elliott no right to refuse to act in the first place. But the Georgia Supreme Court had held previously that the protection against compelled self-incrimination provided by Article I, Section I, Paragraph XVI of the Georgia Constitution did afford the right to refuse such a test. So Elliott argued to on appeal of her conviction that Paragraph XVI gave her the protection that the Fifth Amendment did not, and thus rendered invalid the portions of the statutes allowing her refusal to be admitted against her. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed; OCGA 40-5-67.1 (b) and 40-6-392 (d) were ruled unconstitutional to the extent that they allowed a defendant’s refusal to submit to a breath test to be admitted into evidence at a criminal trial. The Court thus reversed the trial court’s denial of Elliott’s motion to suppress. View "Elliott v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Jimmy Riley was convicted for the 1986 murder of Pauline McCoy, in addition for burglary and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. He appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for a new trial, arguing the trial court should have allowed certain expert testimony and that the trial court erroneously found that the “person unknown” exception tolled the statute of limitation on his non-murder charges under OCGA 17-3-2 (2). Because the Georgia Supreme Court determined the trial court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing expert testimony, it affirmed Riley’s murder conviction. However, the Court vacated the trial court’s judgment with respect to Riley’s convictions for burglary and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony and remanded the case for the trial court to consider, under the facts of this case, when the State had sufficient information to establish actual knowledge of Riley as the “person committing th[ose] crime[s],” thus ending the tolling of the statute of limitation. View "Riley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Varocus Grant appealed his convictions for malice murder and firearm possession during the commission of a felony in relation to the 2011 shooting death of Travis Shivers. Grant argued he was denied a fair trial because the jury array was selected in a manner inconsistent with the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U. S. Constitution and Georgia statutory law, that the trial court erred by denying a motion in limine to exclude an incriminating statement by Grant, that the trial court erred by admitting testimony about fingerprint evidence, and that his trial counsel was ineffective for numerous reasons. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Grant v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
After the Superior Court of Jasper County issued protective orders against Steven and Jodi Bishop in favor of their neighbors, Bernie and Michael Goins and Jana and Keith Powell (“the Neighbors”), the Bishops appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the orders in an unpublished decision. The Neighbors then moved the trial court for costs and attorney fees incurred as a result of the appellate proceedings, asserting that such an award was permissible under OCGA 16-5-94 (d) (3). The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider the fees issue, and, following an examination of the plain language of the statute, the Supreme Court concluded OCGA 16-5-94 (d) (3) did not permit such an award in this case. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals. View "Bishop v. Goins" on Justia Law

Posted in: Civil Procedure
by
Appellant Tito Ivey appealed his convictions for felony murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the 2015 shooting of Franklin Jones. On appeal, Ivey challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions and raises four claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Taking each challenge under consideration, the Georgia Supreme Court found no merit to Ivey’s claims and affirmed his convictions. View "Ivey v. Georgia" on Justia Law

by
Cobb and Gwinnett Counties, Georgia, sued telephone companies for their failure to collect and remit to the Counties a charge imposed on subscribers to offset the cost of 911 services. The telephone companies raised various defenses to the Counties’ suits, including that the 911 charge was a tax that the Counties were not allowed to collect by a lawsuit like this one. The trial court rejected that argument and allowed the cases to proceed, but the Court of Appeals vacated that aspect of the trial court’s ruling and remanded because further development of the record was needed to determine whether the charge was a tax. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded the charge was indeed a tax regardless of more factual development, and the Counties lacked legal authority to collect that tax in this lawsuit. View "BellSouth Telecommunications, LLC v. Cobb County et al." on Justia Law

by
The Anthem Companies, Inc. and Richard Andrews appeal the grant of spoliation sanctions issued against them, arguing that the trial court erred in finding spoliation in the first instance and in sanctioning them with an adverse jury instruction. The underlying suit arose when an Anthem employee allegedly found a bug in her lunch bought from a cafeteria vendor. The employee took pictures, sending copies via email to a building superintendent, and having the images printed at a local drug store. The vendor had been removed as a company cafeteria vendor. This news was posted by someone to Facebook, and the story grew virally. The manager for the vendor, Cheryl Willis, considered the statements in the emails from the superintendent to the company were libelous, asking her attorney to demand the company retract its statements. Wills claimed that, as a result of the wide distribution of the email, the business closed, she and her then-husband filed for bankruptcy, and they lost their home, cars, and savings. Between the time of the original email and the time of trial in 2017, the printed versions of the images were lost. Wills asserted she did not know that the lost drug store prints existed until depositions were scheduled in early 2017. The Georgia Supreme Court determined that under the circumstances of this case, the trial court abused its discretion in awarding spoliation sanctions, and reversed the spoliation sanction. View "The Anthem Companies, Inc. v. Willis" on Justia Law

by
The State appealed a trial court’s judgment of conviction and sentence imposed on Tina Marie Hanna after her plea of guilty to felony murder and related crimes, contending that the sentence was illegal and void because the trial court improperly sentenced Hanna on the basis of the “rule of lenity.” The Georgia Supreme Court determined the rule of lenity was not implicated in this case, because the trial court erred in sentencing Hanna for an offense which was not charged and to which she did not plead guilty. The Court therefore vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings and resentencing. View "Georgia v. Hanna" on Justia Law