Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Doe v. St. Joseph’s Catholic Church, et al.
In December 2018, Phillip Doe filed suit against Saint Joseph’s Catholic Church, Archbishop Wilton Gregory, and the Archdiocese of Atlanta (collectively, “the Church”), asserting various tort claims based in part on childhood sexual abuse Doe allegedly suffered while serving as an altar boy at Saint Joseph’s in the late 1970s. The trial court granted the Church’s motion to dismiss, ruling, in pertinent part, that Doe’s “non-nuisance tort claims” were barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitation, OCGA 9-3-33,2 and could not be tolled for fraud by OCGA 9-3-96. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Court of Appeals, finding that although the trial court correctly determined that Doe’s claim seeking to hold the Church vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior was time-barred, the court erred in concluding at the motion-to-dismiss stage that Doe could not introduce evidence of fraud within the framework of his complaint sufficient under OCGA 9-3-96 to toll the limitation period as to his claims of negligent training and supervision, negligent retention, negligent failure to warn and provide adequate security, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment. View "Doe v. St. Joseph's Catholic Church, et al." on Justia Law
Posted in:
Civil Procedure, Personal Injury
Inquiry concerning Judge JaDawnya Baker
The Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) sought approval of the discipline by consent agreement between the Director of the JQC and JaDawnya Baker, Judge of the Municipal Court of Atlanta, to resolve the formal charges brought against Judge Baker with the issuance of a public reprimand. The agreement, entered into between the JQC Director and Judge Baker, was submitted to the JQC’s Hearing Panel, which approved the agreement and filed it with the Supreme Court for approval. Because Judge Baker’s admitted violations of periodically dismissing cases without the legal authority to do so justified the recommended, and agreed-to, discipline of a public reprimand, the Court approved the agreement. The Court approved the agreement with reservations "about whether, based on the substance of the allegations within the consent agreement, all of the agreed-to violations constitute violations of the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct." View "Inquiry concerning Judge JaDawnya Baker" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Legal Ethics, Professional Malpractice & Ethics
Payne v. Georgia
Lowe Payne appealed his convictions for felony murder and other crimes arising out of the shooting death of Carldrake Finister. On appeal, Payne argued the trial court erred when it admitted evidence of prior difficulties between the parties and that trial counsel was deficient for failing to admit a key piece of exculpatory evidence and for failing to request the trial court to reopen the evidence at the jury’s request. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Payne's convictions. View "Payne v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Ware v. Georgia
Jermaine Ware was convicted of malice murder and other crimes, with a final disposition being entered by the Superior Court of Polk County, Georgia in December 2012. Ware appealed, and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Ware’s convictions on direct appeal. In June 2021, Ware filed a pro se motion in arrest of judgment, alleging, among other things, that the indictment was defective. The superior court denied Ware’s motion, stating that Ware was barred from raising issues that could have been raised on direct appeal. Ware appealed, but the Supreme Court did not consider the merits of Ware’s arguments because the superior court should have dismissed the motion as untimely. Therefore, the Court vacated the trial court’s order and remanded the case with direction. View "Ware v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Williams v. Georgia
Tahja Williams was found guilty of malice murder and other crimes arising out of the death of Keaira Palmer and the wounding of Stefon Cook in a drive-by shooting in 2016. He appealed, arguing (1) the evidence was insufficient merely showed Williams’ presence, it supported his claim of justification, and it failed to corroborate accomplice testimony; (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine to exclude jail calls to which Williams was a party; (3) the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial when a co-defendant refused to answer certain questions; and (4) the trial court improperly instructed the jury that it could find Williams guilty of felony murder and not the underlying aggravated assault. The Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support Williams’ convictions, the jury was authorized to reject Williams’ claim of justification, and the accomplice testimony was corroborated. There was no error in denying Williams’ motion to exclude evidence of a jail telephone call as hearsay because it was an admission of a party opponent. The Court found Williams’ motion for mistrial on the ground that a witness refused to answer questions was properly denied because Williams had the opportunity for a full and complete cross-examination of the witness. Finally, Williams’ contention that the trial court improperly instructed the jury was moot. Therefore, judgment was affirmed. View "Williams v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Ward v. Georgia
Rodricus Ward was convicted of malice murder and firearm offenses in connection with the shooting death of his on-again, off-again girlfriend, Darla Gibbons. He appealed, contending that the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred in allowing six witnesses to testify about hearsay statements that Gibbons made to them. Appellant also argued his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in three ways: by failing to adequately argue against the State’s motion to introduce the hearsay testimony; by failing to try to suppress all of Appellant’s interview with two police detectives; and by failing to sufficiently prepare for trial. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Ward v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Wilson v. Georgia
Roney Wilson challenged his 2018 convictions for felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of his girlfriend Jimeshia Gordon. Appellant contended on appeal that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel in two respects: trial counsel did not object to alleged hearsay from a non-testifying witness used by the State to prove motive, and trial counsel argued a defense that was allegedly contradicted by expert evidence. Because Appellant did not establish that trial counsel performed deficiently in these respects, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Wilson v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Grier v. Georgia
Deunta Grier challenged his 2016 convictions for malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of his girlfriend, Tiffany Bailey. On appeal, Grier contended: (1) the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court committed plain error in admitting hearsay statements allegedly made by Bailey’s five-year-old daughter, J.F., and the couple’s three-year-old daughter, A.G., under the Child Hearsay Statute and in violation of Appellant’s constitutional right of confrontation; and (3) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Grier v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Morrell v. Georgia
Karonta Morrell was charged with 21 counts in connection with the murders of Rocquan Scarver and Jonathan Lang. Prior to trial, the trial court granted Morrell’s motion to sever the counts related to Scarver’s murder from the counts that were related to Lang’s. Morrell was convicted by jury on all charges related to Scarver’s murder. On appeal, Morrell argued the trial court erred in admitting hearsay evidence under the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing provision of OCGA 24-8-804(b)(5), admitting other-acts evidence of witness intimidation connected to Lang’s murder under OCGA 24-4-404(b), and denying his motion to remove a juror whom Morrell claims was not impartial. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the hearsay evidence; it did not abuse its discretion in admitting the other-acts evidence of witness intimidation; allowing the references to Lang’s murder was error harmless; and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Morrell’s motion to excuse the challenged juror. View "Morrell v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Sanders v. Georgia
Kelly Sanders challenged the denial of her special demurrer as to a six-count second indictment against her, arguing that it was insufficient in a number of ways. Sanders was originally indicted for murder and on drugs possession charges. After Sanders filed her notice of appeal, the State indicted Sanders a third time, and the trial court entered orders of nolle prosequi as to the first and second indictments. The State argued that because Sanders was indicted a third time and the trial court purported to dismiss the second indictment that was the subject of this appeal, Sanders’ appeal was moot. To this, the Georgia Supreme Court disagreed: the purported order of nolle prosequi with respect to the second indictment was a nullity. Further, the Court concluded Counts 2, 4, and 5 of the second indictment were subject to a special demurrer. However, the Supreme Court held that Counts 1, 3, and 6 were not subject to a special demurrer on the grounds argued by Sanders in her appeal. View "Sanders v. Georgia" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law