Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

On August 14, 2009, a grand jury indicted Samuel Ellis, along with co-defendant Quantavious Harris, for malice murder, felony murder predicated on aggravated assault, aggravated assault, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. Ellis and Harris were tried separately. In May 2012, following a three-day jury trial, Ellis was convicted of all counts. He was sentenced to life for the malice murder, 5 years’ probation consecutive for the criminal attempt conviction, and 5 years’ probation (suspended) consecutive for the weapons charge. The felony murder count was vacated by operation of law, and the trial court merged the aggravated assault count with the malice murder count. Ellis appeals, alleging that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions and that the trial court erroneously admitted his custodial statement at trial. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Ellis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Allan Ray Williams was indicted in connection with the death of infant Collen Durden. Specifically, Williams was charged with felony murder “while in the commission of a felony, Contributing to the Deprivation of a Minor, by willfully failing to care for said child so that [he] died from asphyxiation in violation of OCGA 16-12-1 (b) (3).” The Georgia Supreme Court granted an interlocutory appeal to address whether OCGA 16-12-1, as it applied to felony contributing to the deprivation or delinquency of a minor, qualified as a predicate offense for felony murder. The Court held that it did not and reversed the trial court. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2011, Ronald Fisher was indicted for malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony for the shooting death of Eddie Shaheed. Fisher appealed his ultimate conviction for malice murder, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict and that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Fisher v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Benji Cortez Sanders was tried by jury and convicted of the murder of Sheila Freeman. Sanders appealed, contending that: (1) the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial; and (3) that it erred when it discharged a juror after the trial was underway. Upon review of the record and briefs, the Supreme Court found no reversible error, and affirmed. View "Sanders v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Chrissharnard Stewart, Christopher Snelson, and Courtney Smith appealed their convictions for the felony murder of Eric Smith, the aggravated assault of Khaljil Smith, and the aggravated assault of Sabrina Crary. The crimes took place in 2012 when the three sought to purchase marijuana and a dispute arose over how much was owed. The Supreme Court affirmed the three appellants’ convictions, but identified a merger error in sentencing that required vacating their sentences in part and remanding for resentencing. View "Stewart v. Georgia" on Justia Law

This appeal arose out of the appellee-mother’s complaint for modification of the divorce parenting plan for her 17-year-old child. Appellant-father contended that the trial court: (1) erred in denying his motion to dismiss the modification action; (2) impermissibly modified his visitation rights to require him to arrange visits with his daughter at times that are mutually agreeable; and (3) improperly awarded the mother $46,593.05 in attorney fees and costs. Aside from what the Supreme Court concluded was a scrivener’s mistake in the order awarding attorney fees, it found no reversible error. Accordingly, the Court affirmed. View "Dallow v. Dallow" on Justia Law

The issue this case presented for the Supreme Court's review arose from a deficiency action brought by appellant SunTrust Bank (“SunTrust”) as the assignee under a motor vehicle conditional sales contract following its repossession and sale of a motor vehicle purchased by appellee Mattie Venable. Specifically, the issue was which statute of limitations applied here: the four-year statute of limitation set forth in OCGA 11-2-725 (1) applicable to actions on contracts for the sale of goods, or the six-year statute of limitation found in OCGA 9-3-24, generally applicable to actions on simple written contracts. After review, the Court concluded that this action was subject to the four-year statute of limitation found in 11-2-725 (1). View "SunTrust Bank v. Venable" on Justia Law

April Gens purchased 4.3 acres of land adjacent to Lake Lanier in Forsyth County. She divided the property into a number of residential lots, including "Lot 7," which is the property at issue in this quiet title case. She created “access strips” which provided lake access for each lot. Gens gave the Bank a security deed covering all of the land in 1999. Two years later, Gens gave another security deed to the Bank for Lots 0, 7 and 8. That deed mistakenly described the property in dispute as only “part of Lot 7.” Gens defaulted on her bank loans and filed for bankruptcy protection. Gens ultimately surrendered all her interest in all the properties. The Bank exercised its right of foreclosure and sold part of Lot 7 to White’s predecessors in title. White later purchased the property, built a house on it, and paid all property taxes as they became due. Six years and a number of months after White purchased the property and began to make improvements on it, Gens filed a quiet title action, asserting she was the legal owner of Lot 7 because the deed to White only conveyed a “part of Lot 7.” Shortly after filing suit, April Gens died, and Nicholle Gens, the administrator of Gens’s estate, was substituted in her stead. White counterclaimed, seeking reformation of the deeds in the chain of title to White’s property, alleging the deeds described the property erroneously due to accident, mistake or fraud. The special master assigned to this matter found that Gens was equitably estopped from claiming title to Lot 7 (excepting the access strip) and that White was entitled to the property. The trial court adopted the special master's findings and conclusions, and quieted title in favor of White. Gens argued on appeal that the trial court relied on the wrong caselaw precedent. The Supreme Court agreed and reversed. Furthermore, the Court remanded for the trial court to determine the merits of White's reformation counterclaim. View "Gens v. White" on Justia Law

Courtney DuBose was tried by jury and convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault, and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, all in connection with the shooting death of Atima Smith. In Case No. S16A1299, DuBose appealed his conviction and sentence, contending that the trial court erred when it sentenced him for felony murder rather than voluntary manslaughter, when it sentenced him separately for felony murder and aggravated assault, and when it charged the jury on voluntary manslaughter. The Supreme Court concluded those contentions lacked merit, and affirmed. In Case No. S16A1300, DuBose appealed a trial court order clarified his sentence, but he failed to assert any claim of error as to that order. Accordingly, the Court dismissed that case. View "DuBose v. Georgia" on Justia Law

At the heart of this case was a dispute among family members over the estate of Edwin Burton Anderson, Jr. (“Burt”): his widow, Donna Lee Morris Anderson and Robert Knox, Jr., in his capacity as the administrator of Burt’s estate; and appellants, Burt’s three children from his first marriage, Charles Anderson, Arthur Anderson, and Kimberly Ware Anderson. At the time of his death, Burt owned a substantial amount of real property, including land which had been bequeathed to him by his father, Edwin Burton Anderson, Sr. (“Edwin”), in a 1962 will. After Burt’s death, Donna and Knox jointly filed an action seeking, in pertinent part: (1) to set aside certain deeds made in June 2013; and (2) construction of Edwin’s 1962 will, arguing that "Item Six" devised the land described therein in fee simple to Burt, thereby placing that property in Burt’s estate upon his death. The trial court granted Donna's motion for partial summary judgment on her claim to set aside the June 2013 deeds, concluding that Charles (who once held power of attorney over the property at issue) had no legal right to execute the deeds. With regard to Edwin’s will, the trial court ruled that Item Six bequeathed a life estate in the described property to Burt and at his death, the fee to Burt’s children. Burt’s children appealed (case number S16A1052) challenging the trial court’s order to the extent it granted partial summary judgment to Donna, and set aside the June 2013 deeds. In a cross-appeal (case number S16X1053), Donna argued the trial court erred by holding that Item Six of Edwin’s will granted Burt a life estate. The Supreme Court reversed that part of the trial court’s order challenged in S16A1052 and affirmed that part the trial court’s order challenged in S16X1053. View "Anderson v. Anderson" on Justia Law