Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Jessica Brown appealed her conviction for malice murder in connection with the fatal shooting of Joshua Gallimore. She challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and the effectiveness of her trial counsel, and argued the trial court deprived her of a fair trial and failed to provide her with counsel for this appeal. Finding no merit to these challenges, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Brown’s conviction. View "Brown v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Horace Coleman and Quantez Mallory were tried jointly by jury and convicted of malice murder in connection with the beating death of Bobby Tillman. Coleman and Mallory each filed separate appeals, which were consolidated for purposes of this opinion. Coleman argued that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial after the prosecution elicited purportedly inadmissible testimony from a jailhouse informant. Mallory argued the trial court erred when it denied his Batson challenge during jury selection and that his due process rights were violated because he lacked access to prospective jurors’ criminal histories maintained by the Georgia Crime Information Center (“GCIC”). Both Coleman and Mallory also contended the trial court’s questioning of the State’s forensic pathologist constituted an erroneous comment on the evidence. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no error, and affirmed. View "Coleman v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Joseph Williams was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2013 shooting death of Adiren Thompson. Williams appealed, arguing the trial court erred in: (1) denying his motion to shuffle the jury pool; (2) excluding evidence supporting his claim of self-defense; (3) denying his motion for a mistrial when the State questioned him about allegations of jury tampering by a third party; and (4) failing to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter. Williams also argues his trial counsel was ineffective. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed because the court was not required to shuffle the jury pool, any error in excluding the evidence in support of Williams’s self-defense claim was harmless, the court’s instruction to the jury cured the prejudicial effect of any improper questioning, the evidence did not support a jury charge on involuntary manslaughter, and Williams failed to show that trial counsel was ineffective. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Kevin Johnson was convicted by jury on all eight counts of an indictment filed in connection with the death of two-year-old Melanie Haynes. Johnson contends that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support his murder conviction and that the trial court erroneously admitted a custodial statement he made without having been advised of his Miranda rights. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded the evidence was plainly sufficient to support the jury’s malice murder verdict and because the challenged statement did not require Miranda warnings. View "Johnson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Anthony Morris was tried and convicted of murder and related offenses in connection with the shooting death of Sidon James. He appealed, arguing the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred during its charge of the jury. Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Morris v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Dontavious Wilson was convicted by jury for the murder of Jack Camp, possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute, and related crimes. He appealed, arguing the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict and the trial court erred by failing to properly instruct the jury. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Wilson’s convictions. View "Wilson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Co-defendants Marcus Battle and Jacobey Carter appealed their convictions and sentences for malice murder and felony murder, respectively, and multiple counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated battery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, all in connection with the fatal shooting of Kenneth Roberts and the wounding or assault with handguns of five other men. In addition, Carter appealed his related conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Battle contended the State committed a Brady violation, that the office of the district attorney should have been disqualified in his case, and that his trial counsel was ineffective. Carter’s sole challenge was that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. After review of both defendants’ arguments made on appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court found the challenges to be unavailing and affirmed the convictions and sentences of both men. View "Battle v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Delroy Booth was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the 2007 death of Shantle Vason. Booth appealed, arguing the trial court erred by: (1) reading the indictment to a competency jury; (2) allowing the State to make improper arguments during closing statements; (3) admitting evidence of other acts to prove intent in this case; and (4) merging instead of vacating the felony murder counts. After review, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the merger of the felony murder counts but otherwise affirmed Booth’s convictions. View "Booth v. Georgia" on Justia Law

DeSean Graham was tried by jury, and convicted for the murder of Carlos Daniels and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Graham appealed, arguing the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions and that the trial court erred when it refused to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense. After reviewing the record and briefs, the Georgia Supreme Court found no error, and affirmed. View "Graham v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Desmond Daniel was convicted by jury of burglary after he was caught attempting to enter a house by removing a back door’s hinges. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order denying Daniel’s motion for new trial. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether, in a prosecution for burglary, a defendant must present “other evidence negating any element of the crime of burglary” in order to receive a criminal trespass charge as a lesser-included offense in a burglary case. The Supreme Court answered that question in the negative: the defendant never assumes any burden to “disprove” any element of a criminal charge. But it is also true that an instruction on a lesser-included offense must be given only if the evidence warrants the instruction. The Court determined that standard was not reached here because there was no evidence at all before the jury to support Daniel’s requested for a criminal trespass charge. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the Court of Appeals. View "Daniel v. Georgia" on Justia Law