Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

Following Willie Lewis' 2003 conviction for malice murder and numerous other offenses, his 2005 appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed as untimely. Lewis filed a pro se extraordinary motion for new trial, and he was appointed new counsel for the purposes of pursuing an out-of-time motion for new trial and a direct appeal. Lewis then filed a motion for an out-of-time appeal, which was granted. In the second appearance of Lewis' case to the Supreme Court, the Court affirmed Lewis' convictions and sentences for two counts of malice murder and other felonies, vacated a conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony and remanded for resentencing on that count, and remanded the case for a hearing on Lewis' claims of ineffective assistance of first appellate counsel. This third appeal concerns the trial court's order on remand which found no ineffective assistance of first appellate counsel. Agreeing with the trial court regarding Lewis' ineffective assistance claim, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Lewis v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Charles Warren was indicted for sending an unsolicited text message containing an image of his genitalia to a woman without notifying her in advance that the message contained nudity. Appellant filed a general demurrer, arguing that OCGA 16-12-81 did not criminalize his conduct, and filed three motions to quash the indictment. The trial court denied appellant's demurrer and his motions to quash, and he appealed. The Supreme Court concluded that appellant was correct that OCGA 16-12-81 did not criminalize his conduct: "[t]he specific prohibition is clearly aimed at tangible material that is delivered in a tangible manner . . . and because appellant did not send anything through the mail, he did not violate this prohibition." View "Warren v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Lenzie Wilkerson appealed a lower court's denial of habeas relief, contending that the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient, under "Garza v. State," (670 SE2d 73 (2008)). He was convicted on kidnapping charges. In addition, Wilkerson contended that the trial court erred by finding that his trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance of counsel. Upon review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court reversed the habeas court's ruling on the kidnapping convictions but affirmed its finding regarding ineffective assistance of counsel. View "WILKERSON v. HART, WARDEN" on Justia Law

Defendant Larry Jenkins appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment against him and his plea in bar based upon the grounds that his retrial for two murders and related crimes would violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy and the right to a speedy trial. Finding no violation of defendant's constitutional rights, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court. View "Jenkins v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Eric Hassel was convicted of felony murder and other offenses in connection with the 2006 shooting death of David Lumpkin. Hassel appealed the denial of his motion for new trial, arguing insufficiency of the evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and evidentiary errors. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Hassel v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Mario Hanes was convicted by jury of malice murder and aggravated assault in connection with the shooting death of Monterrance Thomas and injury of Michael Stewart. On appeal, Hanes contended that the trial court erred in allowing the admission of similar transaction evidence from a 2009 traffic stop and improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence of a handgun recovered during Hanes's 2010 arrest for the crimes related to this matter. Furthermore, Hanes contended that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to the admission of the 2009 similar transaction evidence and by failing to request a limiting instruction or jury charge concerning his convicted felon status. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Hanes v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Kenneth Dubose appealed his conviction and sentence for felony murder. He raised multiple alleged errors at trial to challenge his conviction. Finding none, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. View "Dubose v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Waseem Daker was convicted by jury of malice murder, burglary, false imprisonment, aggravated battery and criminal attempt to commit aggravated stalking. In 2012, appellant was sentenced to life in prison and a term of years. Since his conviction, appellant moved for a new trial and stated his intention to take additional legal action. During his incarceration, appellant contended he complained several times to prison officials about having no access to a law library or legal materials. In 2013, proceeding pro se, appellant attempted to file a petition for a writ of mandamus at Superior Court seeking to compel the Warden to provide him access to a law library. The trial court ordered the clerk not to allow filing of the mandamus petition because it concluded the petition was frivolous on its face. The trial court also denied appellant’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Appellant filed an application for discretionary review and the Supreme Court granted iton the issue of whether the trial court erred in denying filing of applicant’s petition for mandamus. The Supreme Court found the trial court did err in denying appellant's petition. Accordingly, the Court reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. View "Daker v. Humphrey" on Justia Law

Appellant Lamario Barge appealed his felony murder conviction for the shooting death of Steven Bass. On appeal to the Supreme Court, appellant argued: (1) the evidence presented against him was insufficient to support a felony murder charge; and (2) he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's conviction. View "Barge v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Melvin Washington, Jr. was tried by jury and convicted of murder and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. He appealed, arguing: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) that the trial court erred when it admitted evidence of his bad character; and (3) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Washington v. Georgia" on Justia Law