Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant Shaheed Huff was convicted of malice murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the 2012 shooting death of Graham Sisk. The trial court denied Huff’s motion for new trial, and he appealed, arguing the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, that the trial court erred in its charge to the jury and that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Huff v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Following the denial of his motion for new trial, as amended, Sean Mosley appeals his convictions and sentences for malice murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime in connection with the 2011 fatal stabbing of Michael Coleman. Mosley challenged the sufficiency of the evidence of his guilt and the trial court’s supplementation of the record of his trial. Finding the challenges to be without merit, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Mosley v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Superiore Allen was indicted and tried along with Brandon Norwood and Santonio Lucas, and was convicted of malice murder and other crimes arising from the 2009 shooting deaths of Vandit Patel and Jimmy Prak. Appellant contended the evidence presented at trial was legally insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss two counts of the indictment against him and in admitting certain evidence. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Allen v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Quinnard Gibson was tried by jury and convicted of murder in connection with the 2011 fatal beating of Shannon Stanley. Gibson appealed, contending: (1) that the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) the trial court erred when it admitted evidence of a similar transaction; and (3) that it erred when it excluded evidence that Stanley had a reputation for violence. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Supreme Court found no error, and affirmed. View "Gibson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Michael Berrien challenged the trial court’s order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to felony murder in connection with the shooting death of Marcus Collins. Finding no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Berrien v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Glen and Danielle Rollins divorced in December 2013, and they agreed at that time to submit to binding arbitration of their respective claims to certain furniture and furnishings in the marital home. The arbitrator rendered an award in July 2014, and Glen promptly moved for judicial confirmation. While his motion was pending, in August 2014, the trial court ordered Danielle to account for some of the furniture and furnishings that the arbitrator had awarded to Glen that he could not find. Dissatisfied with her accounting, Glen filed a motion to hold Danielle in contempt of the August 2014 order. In April 2015, the trial court found Danielle was in willful contempt of the August 2014 order in at least one respect, and it entered an initial contempt order that directed Danielle to show cause why she ought not be incarcerated for her contempt. Danielle appealed the initial contempt order, both by filing an application for discretionary review with the Supreme Court, and by filing a notice of direct appeal. In May 2015, the Supreme Court denied the application for discretionary review. The direct appeal was not docketed until November 2015. In December 2015, the Supreme Court dismissed the direct appeal, explaining that any appeal of the initial contempt order had to come by application, and noting that it already had denied an application for discretionary review. In the meantime, the trial court held a final hearing on the motion for contempt and entered a final order on November 24, 2015, finding Danielle in contempt of the August 2014 order in additional respects, directing her to immediately surrender any property awarded to Glen, ordering her to pay Glen for any such property that had gone missing or was damaged, and ordering her to pay fines for 34 separate instances of contempt. The trial court also awarded Glen attorney fees. Danielle then applied for discretionary review of the final contempt order, and the Supreme Court granted her application. Danielle argued that the trial court was without jurisdiction to enter a final contempt order while her direct appeal from the initial contempt order still was pending with the Supreme Court. The Supreme agreed, reversed and remanded for further proceedings. View "Rollins v. Rollins" on Justia Law

After Dale Lyman and his wife, Helen, left Cellchem International, Inc. to work for a competitor, Cellchem sued the Lymans and two companies with which they had affiliated (collectively the “Lymans”), asserting claims for computer theft and computer trespass under the Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act(GCSPA, breach of fiduciary duty, and tortious interference with business relations. Cellchem claimed that the Lymans stole data from Cellchem and used it to their competitive advantage. At trial, the jury found the Lymans liable on all claims and awarded Cellchem compensatory damages and attorney fees, as well as punitive damages of $5.1 million. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the judgment against the Lymans on the tortious interference claim. The Court of Appeals also remanded the case to the trial court for a new trial as to punitive damages, reasoning that, despite the fact that the tortious interference claim no longer existed to support a potential award for punitive damages, the remaining claims for breach of fiduciary duty and violations of the GCSPA could still support such a claim. In this regard, because the verdict form at trial did not designate to which claims the punitive damages were assigned, or in what proportion, a new determination had to be made with regard to punitive damages that eliminated any consideration of damages associated with alleged tortious interference and focused only on the remaining tort claims upon which the Lymans had been found liable at trial. After its review of the matter, the Supreme Court concluded that the GCSPA did not authorize an award of punitive damages. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals with respect to the availability of punitive damages under the GCSPA, and remanded this case with directions that the appellate court clarify that any remand to the trial court for a new trial on the issue of punitive damages could not involve any purported award for such damages based on alleged violations of the GCSPA. View "Lyman v. CellChem International, Inc." on Justia Law

In 1998, a 17-year-old Robert Dennis pled guilty to several charges, including malice murder, in connection with the 1997 shooting death of Louise Carter. Dennis was sentenced, in relevant part to this appeal, to life in prison without the possibility of parole for malice murder. In 2015, the State filed a motion to amend Dennis’ sentence based on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in “Miller v. Alabama.” After a resentencing hearing, the trial court reduced Dennis’s malice murder sentence from life without the possibility of parole to life with the possibility of parole. Dennis appealed pro se that resentencing ruling, challenging the trial court’s authority to resentence him. However, finding that the 1998 sentence was made void by “Miller,” and subject to a challenge on Eighth Amendment grounds at any time. Finding that indeed, the trial court had authority to resentence, the Supreme Court affirmed the new sentence. View "Dennis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Amos Southall was tried by jury and convicted of murder and another crime in connection with the killing of Michelle Hainley. Southall appealed, contending that he was denied due process when the prosecution failed to disclose evidence that a material witness hoped to benefit from his testimony against Southall. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Supreme Court found no error and affirmed. View "Southall v. Georgia" on Justia Law

James English appeals his convictions after a jury convicted him for the malice murder of Ricky Payne and first degree arson. English argued the trial court committed plain error by not providing a jury charge regarding the corroboration of confessions. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "English v. Georgia" on Justia Law