Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

In 2016, Michael Gobert was convicted by jury of felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Johnny Montgomery and the aggravated assaults of Edrius Putnam and Deisman Harrison. On appeal, Gobert argued the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions; the trial court erred by excluding Gobert from bench conferences; the trial court erred by failing to require the court reporter to transcribe jury selection and the charge conference; and the trial court erred by failing to rebuke the prosecutor for allegedly improper statements made during closing argument or grant a mistrial. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Gobert v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Nakotah Smith challenged his 2019 convictions for malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of his girlfriend, Crystal Vega. Smith did not dispute that the evidence presented at trial was legally sufficient to support his convictions. Instead, he claimed the trial court erred by admitting hearsay evidence under the residual exception without first explicitly making the determinations required by OCGA 24-8-807 (1) to (3), and that the court improperly relied on cases decided under the old Evidence Code. "Although the better practice is for trial courts to state on the record that each requirement of OCGA 24-8-807 has been met and why," the Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to do so here. Furthermore, the Court found the record did not show the trial court improperly relied on cases interpreting the old Evidence Code in admitting the challenged hearsay evidence. Accordingly, judgment was affirmed. View "Smith v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Terrone Anthony was convicted of malice murder, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the shooting death of Kavader McKibben. On appeal, Anthony contended his trial counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance in four ways. After review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court disagreed and affirmed Anthony’s convictions. View "Anthony v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Courtney Thomas was convicted by jury of malice murder and other offenses in connection with the shooting death of his girlfriend, Shevonta Hardwick. Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Thomas appealed, arguing that his trial counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance by withdrawing a motion to suppress evidence obtained by the police during a search of Thomas’s vehicle. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Thomas v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Fernando Lopez appealed his conviction for malice murder for the stabbing death of Corey Williams. On appeal, Lopez argued that the trial court admitted improper hearsay evidence against him: Williams’s dying statements describing the stabbing and his assailant and Williams’s statements describing his previous and intended future drug sales with Lopez. The Georgia Supreme Court determined the statements about the attack were admissible under the excited utterance hearsay exception, most of the statements about drug sales were admissible under the residual hearsay exception, and the admission of the remaining statement about drug sales was harmless. Accordingly, the Court affirmed. View "Lopez v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Derrick Thurman challenged his convictions for malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Timothy Hobbs. In his sole enumeration of error, Thurman contended his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to investigate and call Appellant’s grandmother, Bernice Thurman, as an alibi witness. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Thurman v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Christopher Byers appealed his convictions for malice murder, aggravated battery, concealing the death of another, abandonment of a dead body, and tampering with evidence, all related to the killing of Ray Walnoha. On appeal, Byers’s primary enumeration of error was that the trial court erred by excluding inculpatory statements by another man involved in the crimes, overheard by a defense witness. Byers also argued his conviction for aggravated battery was not supported by sufficient evidence, and that, alternatively, that count should have merged into his malice murder conviction, and that his sentence for the crime of tampering with evidence should have been that of a misdemeanor. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed that the tampering count should have been treated as a misdemeanor, and so it vacated Byers’s conviction on that count and remanded the case for resentencing. The Court concluded that any error in failing to admit the defense witness testimony at issue was harmless, and that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for aggravated battery on which the trial court properly entered a separate sentence. The Court therefore affirmed Byers’s other convictions. View "Byers v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Malik Rice appealed his convictions for felony murder and other related crimes in connection with the shooting death of Clarence Gardenhire. Rice argued on appeal that the trial court committed plain error in failing to charge the jury on accomplice corroboration and that his conviction for aggravated assault should have merged into his conviction for criminal attempt to commit armed robbery. Finding no plain error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Rice’s convictions, but it vacated his conviction and sentence for aggravated assault because the Court agreed that it should have merged with his conviction for criminal attempt to commit armed robbery under the facts of this case. View "Rice v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Mims Michael Morris, Sr. (“Mims”), Mims Michael Morris, Jr. (“Michael”), and Roy Bradshaw (“Roy”) were convicted by jury of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and robbery in the fatal beating of Earl Gill. In Case No. S21A0191, Mims appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions. In Case No. S21A0192, Michael appealed, also challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, and contending that the trial court committed plain error in failing to instruct the jury not to consider Roy’s statement against him and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed in both cases. View "Morris v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Robert McDaniel appeals pro se from the trial court’s denial of his motion for out-of-time appeal, his general demurrer, and his motion in arrest of judgment. In 2014, a grand jury indicted McDaniel for malice murder (Count 1); felony murder (Count 2); possession of a firearm during the commission of the offense of murder (Count 3); aggravated assault, family violence (Count 4); possession of a firearm during the commission of aggravated assault (Count 5); and aggravated stalking (Count 6) in connection with the shooting death of Maria Nunez-McDaniel. The grand jury also indicted McDaniel for aggravated assault (Count 7) and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Count 8) in connection with an assault on Julia Olmos. On November 4, 2014, McDaniel entered a negotiated guilty plea to malice murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of the offense of murder, and aggravated stalking, as well as to the aggravated assault against Olmos. As part of the plea, Counts 2, 5, and 8 were nolle prossed, and Count 4 was merged with the malice murder count. McDaniel was sentenced to serve life with the possibility of parole for malice murder, a probated five-year consecutive sentence on Count 3, and two ten-year concurrent sentences on Counts 6 and 7. The Georgia Supreme Court determined that because the trial court did not err by concluding that McDaniel failed to show that his appeal of right was lost as a result of his counsel’s constitutionally deficient performance, it also did not abuse its discretion in denying McDaniel’s motion for out-of- time appeal. The Court also determined McDaniel's motion in arrest of judgment was untimely, and and “the trial court was without jurisdiction to rule on [it].” View "McDaniel v. Georgia" on Justia Law