Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

The Georgia Supreme Court granted review in this case to decide whether hearsay identifying an alleged sexual abuser of a child victim was admissible under the hearsay exception for statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment found in OCGA 24-8-803 (4) (“Rule 803 (4)”). New Georgia Rule 803 (4) was materially identical to both an existing federal rule and a provision of the old Georgia Evidence Code. Federal case law construing Federal Rule of Evidence 803 (4) has held that the identity of an alleged child sexual abuser may, in certain circumstances, be admissible. Georgia case law construing the old state rule held that such evidence was not admissible. Because the fundamental rule of the new Georgia Evidence Code was that federal appellate case law applied when a Georgia rule was materially identical to a federal rule and had not yet been interpreted by a Georgia appellate court, the Supreme Court concluded the new Evidence Code displaced the old Georgia precedent and so federal case law applied here. Accordingly, Rule 803 (4) permitted the admission of identity in child sexual abuse cases when reasonably pertinent to medical diagnosis or treatment. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’s decision to the contrary and remanded with instructions to vacate the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings. View "Georgia v. Almanza" on Justia Law

Appellant Phillip Scott Kirby, Sr. was convicted of malice murder in connection with the stabbing death of Emily Mason. On appeal, he argued that his conviction should be reversed because: (1) the trial court erred in admitting custodial statements he made to GBI agents; (2) erred in admitting hearsay testimony about a marking on his wedding ring; and (3) erred in admitting evidence of other crimes he had committed. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Kirby’s convictions. View "Kirby v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Johnathan Felton appealed his convictions related to the 2010 shooting death of Eric Wright. On appeal, appellant alleged the trial court improperly commented on the evidence in violation of former OCGA 17-8- 57. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed his convictions. View "Felton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Richard Davidson and Michael Denay Grant were tried separately by juries, and both were convicted of murder and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the attempted robbery and fatal shooting of Christopher Walker. Davidson and Grant appealed, each arguing the trial court erred when it admitted certain evidence at his trial. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court found error with respect to Davidson. However, the Court determined the trial court erred when it admitted a statement against Grant that law enforcement officers elicited from him in a custodial interrogation after he unequivocally invoked his constitutional right to remain silent, and the State failed to show that this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the Court affirmed in Davidson’s case, and reversed in Grant’s. View "Davidson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Michael Bennefield appealed a trial court’s denial of his motion for an out-of-time appeal of his 1993 convictions based on his guilty plea to the murder of Erika Darby, the rape and armed robbery of Demetras Turner, and the rape of Judy Bryant. Even assuming Bennefield had a proper excuse for failing to file a timely appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court determined the record revealed he was not entitled to an out-of-time appeal. Therefore, the Court affirmed. View "Bennefield v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Denzel Atkins was charged with murder in connection with the shooting death of Elijah Wallace in December 2015. The State filed a pretrial notice of its intent to introduce other acts evidence under OCGA 24-4-404(b). After concluding that the other acts evidence met the criteria for admissibility under the Rule 404(b) test, the trial court nevertheless excluded some of the evidence about a 2013 murder; it allowed other evidence that connected Atkins to the 2013 murder victim, including evidence that Atkins was involved in the victim’s kidnapping. The trial court stated that it excluded evidence of the 2013 murder “out of an abundance of caution.” The State appealed that ruling, arguing the trial court lacked a legal basis to exclude the evidence since the Rule 404(b) test was satisfied. The Georgia Supreme Court found the trial court did not confine its analysis to the purposes for which the State sought to introduce the evidence, it applied a standard the Court disapproved for determining whether sufficient proof existed to establish that Atkins committed the 2013 murder, and its reason for excluding the evidence: “an abundance of caution” was not a permissible basis upon which the court may exclude evidence that is otherwise admissible under Rule 404(b). The Court therefore vacated the trial court’s order and remanded for further proceedings. View "Georgia v. Atkins" on Justia Law

This case involved a variety of constitutional challenges to Georgia’s Child Abuse Registry that a group of high school teachers and administrators filed directly to superior court after their names were put on the Registry. The Georgia Supreme Court determined it could not properly reach the merits of those challenges - and neither could the trial court – because some of the claims were barred by sovereign immunity and the remaining ones should have been raised in the then-pending administrative proceeding also initiated by the teachers and administrators. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the part of the trial court’s order concluding that the trial court could decide the merits of the challenges, vacated the part of the order declaring the Registry statutes and rules to be unconstitutional and granting injunctive relief, and remanded with direction to dismiss the case. View "Georgia Dept. of Human Services v. Addison" on Justia Law

Perry Brown was tried and convicted of felony murder for the death of Willie Joe Beasley. Brown appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in admitting statements he made to police because those statements were involuntary and were given after he invoked his right to remain silent; and (3) the court erred in giving a jury charge on conspiracy. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Brown's conviction. View "Brown v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Phillip Kennebrew brought an interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress certain physical evidence the State wished to introduce in prosecuting him for murder. The Georgia Supreme Court previously reversed Kennebrew’s convictions for malice murder and other crimes on the ground that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, including counsel’s failure to pursue suppression of the evidence in question. When new counsel filed a motion to suppress on remand, the trial court denied the motion, finding that the evidence, obtained from two backpacks seized from the dorm room of Kennebrew’s girlfriend when he was arrested there, “would have inevitably been discovered through a lawful inventory search.” Kennebrew argued that the Supreme Court's ruling in his prior appeal was the law of the case precluding denial of his motion to suppress. Alternatively, he argued the trial court was wrong on the merits because the evidence was not admissible under an inevitable discovery theory. Whether or not the Supreme Court's prior opinion precluded the trial court from denying the motion to suppress, the Court determined the trial court’s ruling was wrong on the merits, and reversed. View "Kennebrew v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In March 2013, a jury found Dantazias Raines guilty of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the killing of Brandy Guined, as well as three counts of misdemeanor obstruction of a police officer. He was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole plus 40 years to serve consecutively. His amended motion for new trial was denied, and he appealed, arguing: insufficiency of the evidence with respect to venue; corroboration of accomplice testimony; and the misdemeanor obstruction charges. He also argued the trial court erred in failing to charge on accomplice corroboration; that the jury improperly considered materials not admitted into evidence; and that his sentence of life without parole is void as a matter of law. The Georgia Supreme Court found the evidence sufficient, and found no plain error with respect to the jury instruction or the consideration of evidence by the jury. The Court therefore affirmed in part, but vacated Raines’ sentence and remanded for resentencing in light of the Court's subsequent decision in Veal v. Georgia, 784 SE2d 403 (2016). View "Raines v. Georgia" on Justia Law