Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Parks v. Georgia
Appellant Lewis Parks a/k/a Harris appeals his convictions related to the 2010 death of Lyndon “Pookie” Tucker. Appellant’s sole enumeration of error is that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of the crimes for which the jury returned verdicts of guilty. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient as a matter of due process to authorize a rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted either as a direct participant or as a party to the crimes for which he was charged. View "Parks v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Womens Surgical Center, LLC v. Berry
Women’s Surgical Center, LLC d/b/a Georgia Advanced Surgery Center for Women (the “Center”) planned to add a second operating room to its premises in order to create opportunities to form contracts with additional surgeons who could then use the Center in connection with their medical practices. However, any such change to the Center could only be legally accomplished if the Center sought and was granted a certificate of need (“CON”) by the Georgia Department of Community Health (the “Department”). Because the Center believed that it should not be subject to the CON requirements, it filed an action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Department in an effort to have Georgia’s applicable CON law and the regulations authorizing it declared unconstitutional. The Department moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing, among other things, that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the case because the Center failed to exhaust its administrative remedies before filing its lawsuit. The trial court denied the motion to dismiss, then both the Center and the Department filed motions for summary judgment with regard to the Center’s constitutional claims. The trial court rejected all of the Center’s constitutional challenges and granted summary judgment to the Department. In Case No. S17A1317, the Center appealed that ruling, and in Case No. S17X1318, the Department appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed in both cases. View "Womens Surgical Center, LLC v. Berry" on Justia Law
Anglin v. Georgia
Nehemiah Anglin appealed his conviction for felony murder and marijuana possession following the death of Damion Wright. Anglin argued the trial court erred by admitting: (1) testimony that he put a “hit” on the State’s primary witness; (2) evidence of his alleged membership in a gang, including evidence of his tattoos; (3) other evidence he says is hearsay; (4) security camera footage; and (5) testimony concerning the credibility of a witness. He also argued that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to certain jury charges and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court found the evidentiary decisions of which Anglin complained either did not amount to an abuse of the trial court’s discretion or were harmless error. The Court also found Anglin’s claims of deficient performance by counsel were either without merit or abandoned, and the Court rejected an argument that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions. View "Anglin v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Wimberly v. Georgia
Following a bench trial, appellant William Wimberly was found guilty of felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, in the 2014 death of Christopher Strickland. He appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence was insufficient; (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; and (3) that he was entitled to a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. Finding these assertions were without merit, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Wimberly v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Cannon v. Georgia
A grand jury indicted appellant Juan Cannon for crimes relating to victim Terrence Wiggins being stabbed in the neck because appellant believed Wiggins owed him money. The record showed the stabbing took place in a DeKalb County restaurant. Anthony Daniels, who was closing up the restaurant, witnessed the stabbing. Shaquanna Fields, who was sitting inside the restaurant, was also alleged to have witnessed the events of that night. Immediately after being stabbed, the victim ran away from appellant and ran towards a police officer who was conducting a traffic stop across the street from the restaurant. Wiggins ran from the restaurant, and flagged down a police officer. The officer asked Wiggins who stabbed him, but Wiggins was running out of breath and was unable to answer. Wiggins eventually died from the injury he sustained to his neck. Appellant represented himself for the first day and a half of trial. On the second day of trial, during his cross-examination of Daniels, who was the fourth witness for the State, appellant decided he wanted to be represented by the public defender who had been standing by to represent him if requested. Trial counsel took over the cross-examination of Daniels and continued to represent appellant for the remainder of the trial. After he was convicted, appellant argued: (1) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel; (3) the trial court erred by not giving a requested jury charge on impeachment by prior conviction (pertaining to Daniels’ testimony); and (4) the trial court abused its discretion when it gave the “Allen” charge after a juror stated his unwillingness to continue listening and discussing the case with the other jurors. The Georgia Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed appellant’s convictions. View "Cannon v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
White v. Georgia
Appellant Wardell White entered guilty pleas to felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting deaths of Victor Martinez and Mauricio Maldonado, and the trial court entered judgments of conviction and sentence on the guilty pleas that did not merge. During the same term of court, Appellant filed two pro se motions to withdraw guilty pleas. The State moved to dismiss the pro se motions on the ground that Appellant was represented by counsel when he filed them, and the trial court granted the State’s motion. Appellant, assisted by counsel, filed a timely notice of appeal. However, finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "White v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Georgia Ass’n of Professional Servers v. Jackson
The Georgia Association of Professional Process Servers and several of its members, private process servers, (collectively, “the Association”) filed this action seeking mandamus, declaratory judgment, and injunctive relief against the sheriffs of Fulton, Cobb, Gwinnett, DeKalb, Clayton, Forsyth, and Paulding Counties (collectively, “the Sheriffs”). In its petition, the Association alleged that the Sheriffs conspired to thwart the use of certified process servers statewide, and have wrongfully failed to consider members’ individual petitions to become certified process servers under OCGA 9-11-4.1, thus rendering the Code section null and of no effect. The Sheriffs responded that the Code section explicitly gave them the power to make a threshold decision whether to permit certified process servers to serve process in their counties. After discovery, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Sheriffs and denied the Association’s motion, finding that under a plain reading of the Code section, the Association was not entitled to any of the relief sought. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court found the trial court should not have ruled on the merits of the Association’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Sheriffs in their official capacities, because those claims are barred by sovereign immunity. Accordingly, the Court vacated that portion of the trial court’s order and remanded for dismissal. Because the trial court correctly granted summary judgment as to the Association’s other claims, the Supreme Court affirmed the remainder of the trial court’s order. View "Georgia Ass'n of Professional Servers v. Jackson" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Civil Procedure, Government & Administrative Law
Shelly v. Town of Tyrone
This case arose from “a long-running battle” that appellant Richard Shelley waged against the Town of Tyrone’s zoning ordinances. Because Shelley failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking relief in the trial court, his as-applied challenges to the zoning ordinances were not ripe for judicial review. The Georgia Supreme Court therefore affirmed the superior court’s order granting Tyrone partial summary judgment on those claims. And because the town enacted a new zoning ordinance, Shelley’s facial challenges to the previous ordinances were moot. The Supreme Court therefore vacated the superior court’s order addressing the merits of those claims and remanded the case with direction to dismiss those claims unless Shelley properly amended his complaint to challenge the ordinance now in effect. View "Shelly v. Town of Tyrone" on Justia Law
Kammerer Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. Forsyth County Bod. of Comm’rs
Kammerer Real Estate Holdings, LLC owned a lot on which it wanted to construct an automotive service facility. Kammerer applied for a site development permit. The lot was subject to a zoning condition under the Forsyth County Unified Development Code that certain “open space” on the lot remain undeveloped. The Director of the Forsyth County Department of Planning and Community Development concluded that the proposed construction would not comply with this condition, and so, he refused to issue a site development permit. Kammerer then asked the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners to amend the zoning condition, but the Board declined to do so. At that point, Kammerer filed this lawsuit against the County, the Board, and the Director, alleging that the Director had misconstrued the “open space” condition, and if it actually meant what the Director said it meant, it was unconstitutional in several respects. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The trial court granted the motion in part and denied it in part. Kammerer appealed the dismissal of certain claims, and the defendants cross-appealed the refusal of the trial court to dismiss other claims. The Georgia Supreme Court determined the trial court properly dismissed a claim for attorney fees, but reversed in all other respects, finding the trial court misinterpreted the controlling caselaw that governed this case, and remanded for further proceedings. View "Kammerer Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. Forsyth County Bod. of Comm'rs" on Justia Law
Olsen v. Georgia
Appellant Robert Olsen was formerly a police officer who was indicted for felony murder and other charges related to the shooting death of an unarmed suspect. The shooting occurred when Olsen responded to a suspicious person report at an apartment complex and ultimately shot the individual who was the subject of the report. Olsen claimed he acted in self-defense, and moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that unauthorized persons were present in the grand jury room during the prosecutor’s presentation of evidence. After conducting a hearing, the trial court denied this motion in a detailed order setting forth the circumstances of the evidentiary proceedings before the grand jury and the applicable law, and then granted a certificate of immediate review. The Georgia Supreme Court granted appellant’s request for interlocutory appeal to address: (1) whether the presence of witnesses, non-lawyer and lawyer spectators during the presentation of evidence to the grand jury during the proceedings leading to the defendant’s indictment in this case violated the recognized need for grand jury secrecy and compromised the grand jury’s independence from outside influence; and (2) whether the defendant was prejudiced by the presence of these individuals such that the trial court erred in refusing to dismiss his indictment. After reviewing the record and considering the parties’ arguments, the Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed. View "Olsen v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law