Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

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

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

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

Demetruis Fortson was convicted by jury of felony murder predicated on armed robbery, hijacking a motor vehicle, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, among other offenses, related to the shooting death of Nicholas Hagood. On appeal, Fortson contended the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to support his convictions, and that the trial court erred in denying his motions for a new trial in its capacity as the “thirteenth juror” and for a directed verdict. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Fortson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Demartre Harris was convicted by jury of felony murder and other crimes for his involvement in two drive-by shootings that injured Laundon Alexander and Patrick Boyd and resulted in the death of Marcus Bowden. Harris argued on appeal: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred by admitting evidence pertaining to the weapons and ammunition that law enforcement officials found at the time of Harris’s arrest; (3) the trial court erred by admitting evidence pertaining to Harris’s Facebook posts; and (4) that Harris received constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial lawyer failed to call Dashauna Wilborn as a witness. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Harris v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Sovensky Maddox was convicted by jury of the malice murder of Lafayette Smith. Maddox’s jury trial was conducted simultaneously with the bench trial of his co-defendant, Jason Evans. Evans was acquitted. Maddox appealed, contending that the trial court erred by simultaneously holding a bench trial for his co-defendant while holding a jury trial for him and by denying his motion to sever the trials. The Georgia Supreme Court determined that Maddox waived any claim of error in regard to the simultaneous jury and bench trials, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Maddox’s motion to sever. View "Maddox v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Jefferies Anderson was convicted by jury of malice murder and other offenses in connection with the shooting death of Jonathan Newton. Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Anderson appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by admitting intrinsic evidence and that his trial counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Anderson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

This case involved Google LLC’s application of internet search algorithms, which it used to auction off search terms for profit to advertisers, and the interests of Edible IP, LLC, which sought to exercise control over the profit generated from its trade name and associated goodwill. In 2018, Edible IP brought an action against Google arising from Google’s monetization of the name “Edible Arrangements” without permission in its keyword advertising program. Google moved to dismiss the complaint, or in the alternative, to compel arbitration. The trial court granted the motion, dismissing the complaint on several grounds, including that it failed to state a claim, and alternatively compelling the parties to arbitration. Edible IP appealed that order, and the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal for failure to state a claim. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether the trial court properly granted Google’s motion to dismiss, and after review, affirmed, finding Edible IP did not state a cognizable claim for relief. View "Edible IP, LLC v. Google, LLC" on Justia Law

Appellant James Shelton was convicted of malice murder in connection with the death of Manuel “Manny” Palmer. Appellant contended on appeal that: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict; and (2) trial counsel was constitutionally deficient for failing to obtain a psychologist’s evaluation regarding his criminal responsibility. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Shelton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Alejandro Martinez-Arias was convicted by jury of aggravated child molestation, aggravated sexual battery, and child molestation. In his appeal to the Georgia Court of Appeals, Martinez-Arias contended, among other things, that the trial court erred when it allowed the State to present opinion testimony about certain purported aspects of Mexican or Latino culture from a school counselor who had worked with M.J., the child victim. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the disputed testimony. The Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari and asked the following question: “Did the trial court commit reversible error when it admitted opinion testimony about cultural characteristics of an ethnic group?” The Court answered, "yes," the trial court abused its discretion when it admitted this testimony, but the Court nonetheless affirmed because the error was harmless based on the record in this case. View "Martinez-Arias v. Georgia" on Justia Law