Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

The Georgia Supreme Court granted prisoner Cardell Abrams’s application for a certificate of probable cause to appeal the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, posing the question of whether the habeas court correctly dismissed the petition for failure to file within the time allowed by OCGA 9- 14-42(c)(3). Because Abrams’s habeas petition was not timely pursuant to any of the alternative paragraphs of the statute of limitation in OCGA 9-14-42 (c), the habeas court correctly dismissed the petition as untimely. View "Abrams v. Laughlin" on Justia Law

Demario Carman, along with three other men, was indicted for murder, armed robbery, and related crimes in connection with the 2012 death of Vanessa Thrasher at O.T.’s Lounge in Atlanta. The State gave notice of its intent to seek the death penalty, and the guilt/innocence phase of Carman’s trial began on November 17, 2014. The trial court declared a mistrial during the latter half of the guilt/innocence phase of Carman’s trial. In this appeal, Carman contended his right not to be subjected to double jeopardy and his right to counsel of his choosing would be violated if he were subjected to a new trial following the mistrial. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of Carman’s plea in bar, thereby returning jurisdiction to the trial court for the purpose of its conducting a new trial. View "Carman v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The issue this case presented for the Georgia Supreme COurt's review centered on whether the contract involved in this case between the City of Atlanta and a private business for the lease of retail concession space at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport created a taxable interest subject to ad valorem taxation by Clayton County. The City of Atlanta owned the Airport, which was partially in Clayton County outside the City’s boundaries. Appellee Aldeasa Atlanta Joint Venture entered into the written agreement with the City to lease space on two different concourses at the Airport for the non-exclusive rights to operate two duty free retail stores. Appellant Clayton County Board of Tax Assessors (“County”) issued real property tax assessments to Aldeasa for the 2011 and 2012 tax years on Aldeasa’s purported leasehold improvements on the two parcels involved in the Concessions Agreement and also on Aldeasa’s purported possessory interest in the two parcels. Aldeasa appealed the assessments and paid the tax pending the outcome of the appeal. The trial court found the Concessions Agreement created a usufruct interest in the property, and not an estate in real property; it rejected the County’s assertion that it was legally authorized to impose a property tax on usufructs located at the Airport; and it also rejected the County’s assertion that the Concessions Agreement created a taxable franchise. Accordingly, the trial court granted Aldeasa’s motion for summary judgement and denied the motion filed by the County. The County appealed, asserting four different taxable interests were created by the Concessions Agreement. The Supreme Court disagreed with the State's assertions and affirmed the trial court. View "Clayton County Bd. of Assessors v. Aldeasa Atlanta Joint Venture" on Justia Law

Appellant Nicholas Wade was convicted of murder and related offenses arising out of the beating death of Keon Belk, as well as the aggravated assault of Vinnie Jones. On appeal, Appellant argued: (1) the jury was improperly charged; (2) the trial court erroneously admitted certain testimony and evidence; and (3) that he was improperly sentenced. Though the Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error with respect to the verdicts, it agreed Appellant was erroneously sentenced. The Court vacated and remanded for resentencing. View "Wade v, Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant John Kennedy Cope appealed his convictions related to the death of Moses Mack. As grounds for his appeal, appellant argued the trial court erroneously admitted two statements he made to police. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed his convictions. View "Cope v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Georgia Department of Human Services, Division of Family and Children Services (“DFCS”) appealed a superior court decision that found Georgia’s central child abuse registry was unconstitutional, both on its face and as applied to appellee Christopher Steiner. The trial court also found that DFCS failed to prove that Steiner committed an act of child abuse by a preponderance of the evidence as required to maintain Steiner’s listing in the registry. The Georgia Supreme Court granted DFCS’s application for discretionary review, and held that Steiner failed to demonstrate a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest sufficient to trigger the due process protections that he claimed were violated by operation of the registry. And because the Act was constitutionally applied to Steiner, he lacked standing to bring his facial challenge on that ground. Furthermore, the Supreme Court held the child abuse registry was not criminal in nature, and that the superior court therefore erred in finding it to be so. And because an abuse investigator’s determination about whether a report of child abuse was supported by the evidence was not a judicial function, the superior court erred in finding that the statute requiring the investigator to report such cases to DFCS for inclusion in the child abuse registry violates the separation of powers provision of the Georgia Constitution. Finally, because at least “some evidence” supported the administrative hearing officer’s conclusion that DFCS had proved an act of child abuse as defined for purposes of the child abuse registry, the superior court erred in reversing the administrative law court. View "Georgia Dept. of Human Services v. Steiner" on Justia Law

Odes Dupree was convicted of malice murder and other crimes arising out of the asphyxiation death of 75-year-old Florene Duke. Raising the sufficiency of the evidence to convict him, Dupree asserted the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict. Dupree’s defense theory was that some other perpetrator committed the crimes. He also claimed he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Finding no reversible error in the trial court proceedings, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed his convictions. View "Dupree v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The constitutional issue involved in this case was identical to the one that was presented in, and resolved by, the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. State, – Ga. – (Case No S18A0100, decided June 18, 2018). Ryan McGouirk was arrested in January 2016 and charged with the violent offenses of aggravated child molestation, child molestation, cruelty to children (for causing pain to a child by having the child touch him sexually), and arson in the first degree. McGouirk was subsequently released on bond. Following his indictment, McGouirk filed special pleas of mental incompetence to stand trial. In Carr, the Georgia Court sustained a due process challenge to OCGA 17-7-130 (c), which is a statute that had been applied to require the defendant who had been accused of violent offenses in that case and who had been found to be mentally incompetent to stand trial to be transferred to the physical custody of the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities (the department) for further evaluation. The part of the trial court’s judgment concluding that OCGA 17-7- 130 (c) was constitutional was reversed[,] the part of the judgment ordering McGouirk to be delivered to the custody of the department for evaluation was vacated, and the trial court’s unchallenged finding that McGouirk was incompetent to stand trial was affirmed. On remand, the trial court was ordered to proceed in accordance with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Carr (and this case], including exercising discretion in deciding whether McGouirk should be committed to the department’s custody for evaluation or should be evaluated on an outpatient basis. View "McGouirk v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The constitutional issue involved in this case was identical to the one that was presented in, and resolved by, the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. State, – Ga. – (Case No S18A0100, decided June 18, 2018). Ryan McGouirk was arrested in January 2016 and charged with the violent offenses of aggravated child molestation, child molestation, cruelty to children (for causing pain to a child by having the child touch him sexually), and arson in the first degree. McGouirk was subsequently released on bond. Following his indictment, McGouirk filed special pleas of mental incompetence to stand trial. In Carr, the Georgia Court sustained a due process challenge to OCGA 17-7-130 (c), which is a statute that had been applied to require the defendant who had been accused of violent offenses in that case and who had been found to be mentally incompetent to stand trial to be transferred to the physical custody of the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities (the department) for further evaluation. The part of the trial court’s judgment concluding that OCGA 17-7- 130 (c) was constitutional was reversed[,] the part of the judgment ordering McGouirk to be delivered to the custody of the department for evaluation was vacated, and the trial court’s unchallenged finding that McGouirk was incompetent to stand trial was affirmed. On remand, the trial court was ordered to proceed in accordance with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Carr (and this case], including exercising discretion in deciding whether McGouirk should be committed to the department’s custody for evaluation or should be evaluated on an outpatient basis. View "McGouirk v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Joseph Gadson and his brother Nkosi Gadson were tried together and found guilty of the murder of Amady Seydi and other crimes committed against Seydi and his girlfriend Tarah Medsker over the span of three weeks in the fall of 2005. Appellant argued on appeal of his convictions that the trial court committed plain error with regard to one burglary charge by failing to instruct the jury on the State’s burden of proof when the evidence of a crime is wholly circumstantial. He also contended he could not obtain full and fair appellate review of his convictions because five documents were missing from the trial court record. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court determined Appellant had not established plain error in the omission of the proof-by-circumstantial-evidence instruction, nor did he show that he was harmed by the incomplete record. The Court therefore affirmed his convictions. View "Gadson v.Georgia" on Justia Law