Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Guy William Heinze, Jr. was convicted by jury for the malice murders of Brenda Flanagan, Guy Heinze, Sr., Russell Toler, Sr., Chrissy Toler, Russell Toler, Jr., Michael Toler, Michelle Toler, and Joseph West; the aggravated assault of B. J., a child; and two drug possession offenses. Heinze lived with his father and several members of the Toler family. In late 2009, Heinze told a coworker about a dispute with his father over money that his father planned to give to other members of his family. Heinze said, “Man, my daddy ain’t never done nothing for me and my brother. Man, I’m going to kill him, I’m gonna kill ‘em all.” Heinze had also gotten into a fight with Russell Toler, Jr., about his car and had told his coworker that he was going to beat Chrissy Toler if she did not arrange a date for him with her friend. According to the medical examiner, the victims had been severely beaten, each sustaining head injuries with a blunt, cylindrical object similar in shape to a gun barrel. On appeal, Heinze argued only that the trial court erred by improperly removing a juror during deliberations and replacing that juror with the first alternate juror. Finding no error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed his conviction. View "Heinze v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Nicolas Lopez was convicted of malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the shooting death of Robert Moon. After his convictions, Lopez waived his right to the assistance of counsel. Representing himself, Lopez appealed, arguing: (1) his trial counsel labored under a conflict of interest; (2) he otherwise received ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) the trial court erred in failing to ensure an accurate transcription of the trial; (4) the trial judge erred in failing to recuse himself; and (5) the trial court erred in recharging the jury. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. View "Lopez v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Malik Golden appealed his conviction for felony murder for the death of Donell Hawkins during an attempted robbery. Golden argued the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. He also challenged the trial court’s admission of his custodial statement on the ground that it was not made freely and voluntarily. And he argued the court erred in admitting hearsay evidence and in denying his motion for a mistrial when his co-indictee testified that Golden had committed a previous robbery. After review of the trial court record, the Georgia Supreme Court determined the evidence was sufficient to support Golden’s conviction and the trial court committed no reversible error. Judgment was affirmed. View "Golden v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Reggie Gardner was convicted by jury of felony murder in connection with the shooting death of Franklin Wright. Gardner appealed the denial of his motion for a new trial, contending that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to request a jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter. The Georgia Supreme Court determined the trial court did not err in finding that counsel’s performance was not constitutionally deficient because counsel chose to present an “all-or-nothing” defense, which was reasonable given that the evidence did not show the irresistible passion resulting from serious provocation required to support a charge on voluntary manslaughter. Therefore, judgment was affirmed. View "Gardner v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Antonio Lanier appealed his convictions for malice murder and other offenses in connection with the shooting deaths of Auda and Gerald Anne Love. Lanier contended the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions because it was based on his co-defendants’ uncorroborated testimony, that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, and that the trial court erred by admitting crime scene and autopsy photographs and by improperly excusing certain potential jurors. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. View "Lanier v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Dallas Beck was convicted of felony murder and possession of a weapon during the commission of a crime in connection with the 2012 shooting death of Corey Liverpool. In Beck’s previous appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court, the Court remanded the case for the trial court to review his claim that jurors considered extrajudicial information regarding sentencing. The trial court rejected that claim on remand, and Beck appealed again. In addition to raising the juror issue, Beck argued the trial court erred by refusing to admit carious evidence about the victim, and by failing to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter. Because the Supreme Court deferred to the trial court’s finding that the testimony about juror misconduct was not credible, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Beck’s juror misconduct claim. The Supreme Court also concluded the trial court properly refused to give a jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter because no evidence supported it, and that any error by the trial court in limiting evidence about the victim was harmless. View "Beck v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Craig Thrift was convicted of felony murder in connection with the death of Terry Rouse. On appeal, Thrift challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction; the denial of his motion for new trial on the general grounds; the denial of five motions for mistrial; the admission of certain evidence presented by the State; the exclusion of certain evidence offered by the defense; and the restriction of his attorney’s cross-examination of one of the State’s witnesses. Additionally, Thrift argued he was entitled to a new trial under a cumulative error analysis. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Thrift's conviction. View "Thrift v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Eddie Clark pleaded guilty to felony murder and other crimes in connection with the stabbing death of Elizabeth Hutcheson. Years later, he filed a motion for out-of-time appeal, which the trial court summarily denied without a hearing. Clark alleged in his motion for out-of-time appeal that his failure to file a timely appeal resulted from his plea counsel’s constitutionally ineffective assistance. If Clark could prove this allegation, he would be entitled to an out-of-time appeal. However, the trial court denied Clark’s motion without conducting a factual inquiry into his claim of ineffective assistance. Accordingly, as the State conceded, under the circumstances presented in this case, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded “for the court to conduct an evidentiary hearing and determine whether plea counsel’s ineffective assistance was responsible for [Clark’s] failure to pursue a timely appeal.” View "Clark v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Lawrence Hughes was convicted by jury of the felony murder of Jamon Epps, and related crimes. On appeal, he contended: (1) the evidence was insufficient; (2) the trial court made certain evidentiary and charging errors; and (3) trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective. Finding no reversible error, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed Hughes' convictions. View "Hughes v. Georgia" on Justia Law

The Hearing Panel of the Judicial qualifications Commission ("JQC") recommended that Judge Robert "Mack" Crawford be "removed from office" for violating Rule 1.1 of the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct ("CJC") which said "Judges shall respect and comply with the law." Judge Crawford resigned as Superior Court judge of the Griffin Judicial Circuit upon investigation by the JQC. The complaint alleged that Crawford violated CJC Rule 1.1 in two ways: (1) by “impermissibly converting money from the registry of the Superior Court of Pike County . . . when he ordered the Pike County Clerk via handwritten note to disburse $15,675.62 in funds from the court registry to him via check” and “then cashed and used a portion of the check for his personal benefit and deposited the remainder of this money in his personal checking account,” although he later returned the funds; and (2) by “failing to follow the proper procedure for the disbursement of funds, even if the money had been his, as required by law,” noting the certification requirement for withdrawal of funds from a court registry contained in Uniform Superior Court Rule 23. In 2002, when Crawford was in private practice, he had deposited the funds into the registry from his client trust account in connection with a lawsuit. The JQC complaint acknowledged that Crawford claimed that at least some of the money was owed to him as attorney fees and expenses.The Hearing Panel did not recommend that Crawford be permanently barred from seeking or holding judicial office. The JQC Director did not file a notice of exceptions, thereby accepting the Hearing Panel’s recommendation. Under rules promulgated by the Georgia Supreme Court, the Court had to file a written decision either dismissing this matter or imposing a sanction. The Court elected to dismiss. View "Inquiry Concerning Judge Robert M. Crawford" on Justia Law