Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

Kenneth Brown appealed his convictions and sentences for malice murder, aggravated assault, and giving false information to a law enforcement officer, all in connection with the axe slaying of Charlotte Grant. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Brown’s sentences. View "Brown v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Kenneth Lee Inman was convicted for murdering Philip Tedder, kidnapping Tedder and James Niebaum, and related crimes. He appealed his convictions and the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Inman v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Terry Hagan pled guilty to the malice murder of his wife and the attempted murder of her lover. He was sentenced to serve life in prison with the possibility of parole for the murder and 30 concurrent years for the attempted murder. Appellant appealed the trial court’s order denying his motion for an out-of-time appeal. Because his claims were meritless or could not be resolved based the trial court record, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Hagan v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Jason Pierce was indicted in 1999 on charges of malice murder (two counts), felony murder (four counts), aggravated assault (three counts) and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was ultimately sentenced to two terms of life without parole on the malice murder convictions and consecutive terms of years on his remaining convictions. Appellant appealed the trial court’s denial of his plea in bar based on double jeopardy. Finding no error in the denial of his motion, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Pierce v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Robert Lee Reeves, Jr., was sentenced to life after a jury found him guilty of felony murder predicated upon aggravated assault. Appellant argued the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial brought on two grounds: (1) insufficiency of the evidence; and (2) that evidence of a prior attempted rape for which he was previously convicted was improperly admitted as a similar transaction. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Reeves v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Tony Lamar Thompson appealed his convictions for felony murder and related crimes regarding the death of Reynaldo Jackson. On appeal, he cited several alleged errors at trial, and challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him. Finding no reversible error, however, the Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. View "Thompson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Cornelius Moore was tried by jury and convicted of murder and several other crimes, all in connection with the killing of Jezreel Hammond. Moore appealed, arguing that the trial court erred with respect to the admission of certain evidence at trial. The Supreme Court found no reversible error with respect to the evidence admitted at trial, but concluded, however, that the trial court did err when it convicted Moore of three distinct counts of unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The Court therefore vacated the conviction and sentence as to one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and otherwise affirmed the Moore’s conviction and sentence. View "Moore v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Brandon Johnson was indicted with his uncle, Charles Ellery, on charges of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during commission of a crime. After a joint jury trial, appellant was found guilty of all charges for which he was indicted and sentenced to life in prison. His motion for new trial was denied, and he appealed, asserting that the trial court erred by failing to grant his motion for mistrial made after the State introduced evidence of a similar transaction against Ellery. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Johnson v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Dexter Jones was convicted of felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of Kenny Johnson. He appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for new trial. Appellant contended that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to emphasize certain testimony from the State's crime scene investigator in support of a claim of self-defense. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed appellant's conviction. View "Jones v. Georgia" on Justia Law

In 2012, Lewis Carlton made several telephone calls to neighbors of the foster mother of his three children. Representing himself as an employee with the Georgia Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS), Carlton questioned the neighbors regarding the foster mother's treatment of his children. Neighbors brought the foster mother over to listen in on a conversation with Carlton, at which point the foster mother identified the caller as Carlton and telephoned the police. Carlton was indicted on thirteen separate counts; however, orders of nolle prosequi were entered on ten as part of a negotiated plea agreement. The remaining three counts each charged Carlton with impersonating of public employee. Carlton then backed out of the plea deal and decided to take his case to trial. The next day, the parties had lengthy argument as to the constitutionality of the impersonation statute as applied to Carlton. Shortly thereafter, Carlton requested the same plea deal that previously had been offered. The parties then returned to superior court and Carlton entered an Alford plea to all three impersonation counts. At that hearing, Carlton repeatedly expressed to the superior court his concern and understanding that he would retain the right to attack the statute's legality, stating he would not waive a habeas corpus to challenge impersonation statute. Carlton then petitioned the superior court for a writ of habeas corpus, initially asserting ineffective assistance of counsel and violation of his due process right for being convicted of three counts of an indictment which failed to establish a crime. However, he amended his petition to leave only his due process argument and his challenge to the impersonation statute. The habeas court granted Carlton's petition, ruling that OCGA 16-10-23 failed to adequately hold itself out as applicable to public employees as opposed to public officers, and thus, the statute did not provide Carlton with appropriate notice that he could be criminally responsible for impersonating a DFCS employee. The warden appealed the superior court's grant of habeas relief. Upon review, the Supreme Court disagreed with the superior court's reasoning and reversed. View "Kennedy v. Carlton" on Justia Law