Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

In 2011, a grand jury indicted Marquis Lowe for malice murder, felony murder while in the commission of aggravated assault, felony murder while in the commission of aggravated battery, aggravated assault, aggravated battery, possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime of malice murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime of aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime of aggravated battery all in connection with the death of Dajohn Milton. Lowe was tried by jury and convicted on all counts. He was sentenced as a recidivist to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the crime of malice murder, and a consecutive term of five years in prison for possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime of malice murder; the remaining convictions either merged with a crime for which a sentence was entered or were vacated by operation of law. Lowe raised a number of challenges to the conduct of trial and to his sentences, but finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Lowe's conviction. View "Lowe v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Marcus Oliphant was convicted of malice murder and 15 other offenses in connection with a 2006 armed robbery and shooting at a mobile home park in Carrollton. Appellant challenged his convictions and sentences, claiming that the evidence was insufficient on some counts; that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance; that the trial court imposed an illegal sentence on one count; and that the trial court failed to merge or vacate certain convictions for sentencing purposes. Though the Supreme Court found that the evidence was sufficient and that trial counsel did not render deficient performance, the Court agreed that appellant was improperly sentenced in various respects, and therefore vacated some of the sentences. The case was remanded for further proceedings. View "Oliphant v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Paul Sherman was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault, concealing the death of another, and obstruction of a law enforcement officer in connection with the 2010 death of Joanne Kent. Appellant appealed the denial of his amended motion for new trial and his conviction and sentence, asserting that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance and the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Sherman v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Christopher Sutton was one of five perpetrators who conspired to rob the murder victim, a tattoo artist. Appellant was convicted of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of the artist. He appealed, arguing, inter alia, the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Sutton v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellee John Wyatt was indicted on seven charges related to the death of two-year-old Andrea Marginean. After the trial court granted his special demurrers on four of the counts, the State filed an interlocutory appeal. Wyatt, who was then 29 years old, was babysitting Andrea and her two brothers, aged four and six. When their mother, Nicole Marginean, got home that day, Andrea was essentially unresponsive, and Ms. Marginean took her to a local hospital. Andrea died three days later. About three months later, a grand jury indicted Wyatt for felony murder (Count 1), two counts of aggravated battery (Counts 2 and 3), and cruelty to children in the first degree (Count 4). Shortly after his indictment, Wyatt filed a motion to suppress statements he made to the police. The case then languished for almost four years, until a "Jackson-Denno" hearing on that motion was held in 2013. The following week, a grand jury re-indicted Wyatt, now charging him with three counts of felony murder (Counts 1-3), aggravated battery (Count 4), aggravated assault (Count 5), and cruelty to children (Count 6). Wyatt filed special demurrers to Counts 1, 2, 4, and 5. The trial court held a hearing, at which the State introduced, without objection, reports from the hospitals where the victim was treated and from the medical examiner. At the demurrer hearing, the State argued that the indictment was sufficiently specific and that it was permitted to allege in Count 5 that the object with which Wyatt assaulted Andrea was unknown because her head could have been hit by "the toilet or the tub or by the defendant's own hand." The trial court summarily granted Wyatt's special demurrers to Counts 1, 2, 4, and 5. The Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal to consider whether those four counts, as indicted, were sufficient to put Wyatt on notice as to what he must defend against at trial. Because the Supreme Court has held previously that an indictment need not allege the manner of an aggravated assault or aggravated battery to survive a special demurrer, such an evidentiary hearing clearly was not required on that issue; even if the State knew the way in which those crimes were committed, it need not provide that information in the indictment or at a demurrer hearing to prevail. "Indeed, the only way for the State to truly prove that it cannot specify the weapon or object the defendant used would be . . . to make a full presentation of the State's evidence before actually trying the case. Nothing in our cases dealing with material elements that are alleged to be unknown has indicated that we would impose such an impractical requirement. . . .those are matters for trial, not a special demurrer." View "Georgia v. Wyatt" on Justia Law

Appellant Steven Phillip Smith appealed his convictions for the felony murder of Jatinjumar "Justin" Patel, and for other crimes. Appellant raised multiple issues as grounds for appeal: (1) the trial court erred in admitting his confession to police and, in turn, the sufficiency of the evidence related to his convictions for the crimes associated with the shooting; (2) that the State failed to prove venue for the shooting; and (3) that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advance arguments before and during trial that the portion of his confession to police regarding his sister was inadmissible. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's convictions. View "Smith v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Donna Slaughter appealed her convictions for the shooting death of Michael Haegle. Appellant argued: (1) the evidence was insufficient to convict her of the crimes for which she was charged; and (2) the trial court erred when it failed to grant her motion for mistrial. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's convictions. View "Slaughter v. Georgia" on Justia Law

A grand jury returned an indictment charging appellant Randy Murray with malice murder, felony murder (aggravated assault), felony murder (possession of a firearm by a convicted felon), aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during commission of a felony, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon all related to the shooting death of Jerome Barnett. The two counts relating to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon were bifurcated from the jury trial. Appellant was tried for the remaining counts, and the jury found him guilty on all counts. The trial court then sentenced appellant to life without parole for malice murder. The two counts relating to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon were dead docketed. Appellant moved for a new trial. After a hearing, the trial court denied appellant's motion for new trial by 2012. Appellant challenged that denial on appeal to the Supreme Court, but finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's conviction. View "Murray v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Latilia Hicks, Leo Sanders, Darrian Pye, and Lorenzo Chambers were jointly indicted for felony murder and numerous other crimes relating to the shooting death of Maynon Freeman. Sanders pled guilty to voluntary manslaughter and testified against the remaining defendants, who were tried together. Appellant and Pye were found guilty on all counts, and Chambers was found not guilty on all counts. In her appeal, appellant contended, among other things, that the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions and that her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Hicks v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2010, a grand jury indicted Carlos Hamilton for malice murder, felony murder while in the commission of the crime of aggravated assault, felony murder while in the commission of the crime of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Hamilton was tried and found guilty of all charges. Hamilton appealed his convictions and sentences. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Hamilton v. Georgia" on Justia Law