Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

David Nesbit, Jr. was convicted of malice murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of Gregory Gabriel and the aggravated assault of Cachino Minor. On June 17, 2020, Nesbit and his girlfriend, Jamonda Kirkland, went to a Texaco gas station where Nesbit encountered Gabriel and Minor. A confrontation ensued, resulting in Nesbit shooting Gabriel, who later died from his injuries. Nesbit was indicted on multiple counts, including malice murder and aggravated assault. The jury found Nesbit guilty on all counts, and he was sentenced to life without parole for malice murder, with additional consecutive sentences for other charges.Nesbit filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court after an evidentiary hearing. Nesbit then appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia, arguing that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to assert a defense of habitation and for not objecting to the State’s closing argument.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and found that the defense of habitation was not applicable because there was no evidence that Gabriel or Minor attempted to enter Nesbit’s vehicle. The court also determined that Nesbit’s trial counsel made a reasonable strategic decision not to object to the State’s closing argument, which was a response to the defense’s claims about witness preparation. The court concluded that Nesbit’s trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective and affirmed Nesbit’s convictions. View "NESBIT v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Christopher Berry was convicted of malice murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of Cordeldrick Laquinn Brooks. The crimes occurred on September 22, 2015, and Berry was indicted on multiple counts, including malice murder, felony murder, kidnapping, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. A jury trial was held in April 2018, where Berry was found guilty on all counts except one, which was nol prossed. Berry was sentenced to life in prison for malice murder and kidnapping, along with additional concurrent and consecutive sentences for other charges.Berry moved for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court. He then appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed verdict and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to hearsay evidence. The trial court had denied Berry's motion for a directed verdict, and Berry's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim was not raised in his amended motion for a new trial, thus it was waived.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the evidence and found that the jury was properly instructed and could reasonably conclude that co-defendant Kameron Reese was not an accomplice, making corroboration of his testimony unnecessary. The court held that the trial court did not err in denying Berry's motion for a directed verdict. Additionally, Berry's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was not properly before the court as it was not raised in the trial court. Consequently, the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed Berry's convictions. View "BERRY v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Mickey Lewis Byrd, Jr. was convicted in a bench trial for malice murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of Steven Moore. The incident occurred on November 3, 2019, at a party in Claxton, Evans County. Byrd, who was a chaperone at the party, was seen with a gun and later shot Moore three times after an altercation. Witnesses testified to seeing Byrd shoot Moore, and Byrd's girlfriend's daughter sent text messages indicating Byrd's involvement. Byrd was arrested after several days and denied killing Moore during his interrogation.The Evans County grand jury indicted Byrd on multiple counts, including malice murder and felony murder. The trial court found Byrd guilty of all counts except possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Byrd was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole for malice murder and an additional five years for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Byrd filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and affirmed the trial court's decision. The court held that Byrd's waiver of his right to a jury trial was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, as evidenced by the trial court's thorough colloquy and Byrd's signed waiver form. The court also found that Byrd's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was without merit, as his trial counsel's advice to waive a jury trial was based on reasonable strategic considerations. The court deemed Byrd's argument regarding the insufficiency of evidence abandoned due to a lack of specific argument and citation to the record. View "BYRD v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

On July 13, 2013, Robert Pett was found dead from gunshot wounds on the back porch of a vacant house in Lowndes County, Georgia. Michael Pindling, Deron Wallace, and Kathryn Cortez were indicted for various crimes related to Pett's death. At their joint trial in May 2014, Pindling was convicted of malice murder and other charges. However, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed Pindling's convictions due to a jury instruction error. Pindling was retried in a bench trial in May 2023, representing himself, and was again found guilty on all counts.The Supreme Court of Georgia had previously reversed Pindling's convictions because the trial court failed to instruct the jury on the requirement that an accomplice's testimony must be corroborated. At the retrial, Cortez, who had pleaded guilty to armed robbery, was the main witness. She testified that Pindling proposed robbing Pett and that he shot Pett during the robbery. Wallace, who had been convicted of felony murder in the prior trial, was uncooperative but his prior statements were used as evidence.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and affirmed Pindling's convictions. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions under federal constitutional due process. The court found that Cortez's testimony was sufficiently corroborated by other evidence, including surveillance videos, phone records, and the discovery of the murder weapon at Pindling's residence. The court also concluded that the evidence excluded any reasonable hypothesis of Pindling's innocence, thus satisfying the requirements of Georgia statutory law. View "PINDLING v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Billy Ray Green was convicted of attempting to entice a child for indecent purposes and other crimes related to his interaction with a 15-year-old girl, A.H., on March 12, 2021. Green approached A.H. while she was walking her dog, told her that her father had asked him to pick her up, and gestured for her to get into his car. A.H. refused, and Green drove away when a neighbor arrived. Green was later identified by A.H. and arrested. Evidence presented at trial included Green's interactions with two female CVS employees earlier that day, where he made unwanted, sexually suggestive comments and attempted to lure them into his car.The Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed Green's conviction for attempted enticement, finding that the evidence was insufficient to prove that Green's actions were motivated by an intent to commit indecent acts or child molestation. The court held that the comments Green made to the CVS employees, who were adults, were not relevant to his intent regarding A.H., a minor.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and disagreed with the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court held that the evidence of Green's interactions with the CVS employees was relevant to his intent to entice A.H. for indecent purposes. The court reasoned that Green's actions toward the CVS employees, which occurred close in time and under similar circumstances, had a tendency to make it more probable that his intent with A.H. was also sexual in nature. The Supreme Court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support Green's conviction for attempted enticement and reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals. View "THE STATE v. GREEN" on Justia Law

Quame Lamar Collins was convicted for his involvement in the armed robbery of three men, which resulted in the deaths of Eddie Louis Grubbs and Marshall Jordan, and injuries to Walter Smith. The incident occurred on January 23, 2017. Collins was indicted on multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder, armed robbery, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. In June 2021, a jury found Collins guilty on all counts, and he was sentenced to multiple consecutive life sentences and additional years for other charges.Collins filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court. He then appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the trial court erred in not granting a mistrial, and the trial court improperly admitted certain hearsay statements.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and found that the evidence presented at trial was constitutionally sufficient to support Collins's convictions. The court noted that eyewitness testimonies and Collins's own admissions provided ample evidence of his involvement. The court also held that Collins waived his right to complain about the trial court's denial of his motion for a mistrial by declining a curative instruction. Lastly, the court determined that any hearsay statements admitted were either properly admitted or harmless, as they were cumulative of other evidence.The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed Collins's convictions and the trial court's rulings, concluding that there was no reversible error in the proceedings. View "COLLINS v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Mikeal Callaway was charged with malice murder and other crimes after a shooting spree in his SUV that spanned five miles, four hours, and two counties (Fulton and DeKalb) on February 21-22, 2018. The spree involved four separate shootings, resulting in one death and multiple injuries. Callaway was identified by witnesses and evidence, including surveillance footage and forensic analysis. He was arrested after a high-speed chase and found with a 9mm handgun linked to the shootings.The DeKalb County jury convicted Callaway on all counts, including malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and fleeing a police officer. He was sentenced to life without parole for malice murder, with additional consecutive sentences for other charges. Callaway's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court, and he appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and affirmed Callaway's convictions. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts, including the aggravated assault charges for the children in the backseat of the car and the venue for the McMillon shooting. The court also found that the evidence of the Fulton County crimes was properly admitted as intrinsic evidence, and there was no prosecutorial misconduct that warranted reversal. Additionally, the court rejected Callaway's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and found no cumulative error that denied him a fair trial. View "CALLAWAY v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Savion Nathaniel Dillard was convicted in 2021 for malice murder and other crimes related to the armed robbery of two 15-year-olds, Branden Gerena and Denzel Idris, during which Gerena was fatally shot. Dillard had arranged to meet Gerena under the pretense of buying marijuana but instead robbed and shot him. Dillard fled the scene and was later apprehended in Wisconsin. Evidence included witness testimonies, security footage, and Dillard's own admissions.A Gwinnett County grand jury indicted Dillard and Denzel Wilburn, who later pled guilty to a reduced charge and testified against Dillard. The jury found Dillard guilty of all charges, and the trial court sentenced him to life in prison without parole for malice murder, with additional concurrent and consecutive sentences for other charges. Dillard's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and affirmed the convictions. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions under both constitutional due process and Georgia statutory law. The court found that the direct evidence, including testimonies from Idris and Antonio English, who testified about Dillard's admission, was sufficient. The court also rejected Dillard's argument that Idris's testimony required corroboration, as Idris was not an accomplice in the charged crimes but rather a victim. The court concluded that the evidence presented at trial was adequate to uphold Dillard's convictions. View "DILLARD v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Terrance Hill was convicted of felony murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of Gloria Starr Armour. The incident occurred on July 25, 2016, during a shootout between Hill, his brother Devonte, and Joslyn McQueary, who were in one vehicle, and Keaira Dell and Demetrius Lukerson, who were in another vehicle. Armour, an innocent bystander in a third vehicle, was fatally struck by a projectile. Hill was indicted on multiple counts, including felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was convicted on all counts and sentenced to life in prison without parole, plus additional consecutive sentences for other charges.Hill's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court, leading to his appeal. He argued that the trial court committed plain error by not instructing the jury that a convicted felon could use a firearm in self-defense. He also claimed ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to secure a ruling on this instruction request. The trial court had given a general justification instruction but did not specifically address the use of a firearm by a convicted felon in self-defense.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and found that while the trial court likely erred in not giving the specific instruction requested by Hill, this error was not clear and obvious under the plain-error standard. The court noted that existing precedents did not explicitly require such an instruction. Consequently, Hill's claim of plain error failed. Additionally, the court found that Hill's counsel did obtain an implicit ruling on the requested charge, and thus, there was no ineffective assistance of counsel. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed Hill's conviction. View "HILL v. THE STATE" on Justia Law

Evelyn-Natasha La Anyane was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol less safe and other traffic offenses. During a traffic stop, she was read the statutory implied-consent warning and consented to a blood test, which revealed a blood alcohol content above the legal limit. La Anyane argued that Georgia’s implied-consent statutory scheme is unconstitutional, claiming it coerces drivers into consenting to blood tests by falsely stating that refusal can be used against them at trial. She also contended that the trial court made evidentiary errors by not allowing her to cross-examine an expert with a study on field sobriety tests and by admitting evidence of her blood alcohol content.The trial court denied La Anyane’s motion to suppress the blood test results and admitted the evidence at trial. The jury found her guilty of all charges. La Anyane appealed, arguing that the implied-consent warning was unconstitutionally coercive and that the trial court made evidentiary errors.The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the case and held that the implied-consent warning was not unconstitutionally coercive. The court found that the warning did not state that consent was mandatory and that the statement about refusal being used at trial was not false. The court also determined that La Anyane’s consent to the blood test was freely and voluntarily given, making the search valid under the Fourth Amendment. Consequently, her as-applied and facial challenges to the implied-consent statutory scheme failed.Regarding the evidentiary issues, the court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the study on field sobriety tests due to lack of proper foundation and in admitting evidence of La Anyane’s blood alcohol content, as it was relevant to the DUI less safe charge and not unfairly prejudicial. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the trial court’s judgment. View "LA ANYANE v. THE STATE" on Justia Law