Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Justia Daily Opinion Summaries <notifications@justia.info>
Date: April 25, 2012 9:02:50 AM EDT
To: Victor Cuvo <vacuvo@yahoo.com>
Subject: Georgia Supreme Court Summaries for April 25, 2012
Reply-To: Justia Daily Opinion Summaries <notifications@justia.info>
If you are unable to see this message, click here to view it in a web browser.
To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add notifications@justia.info to your address book.
Justia Daily Opinion Summaries is a FREE service.
Subscribe to summaries of US appellate court opinions at Daily.Justia.com
Practice area emails with summaries from all reviewed courts are sent weekly.
You May FREELY Redistribute This E-Mail in Whole.Today on Verdict
Mug Shot Mania: The Legal and Policy Issues Surrounding Private Websites' Postings of Arrest Photos
Justia columnist and U. Washington law professor Anita Ramasastry comments on the phenomenon of Internet mug shot galleries. Read Article
Daily Opinion Summaries
Georgia Supreme Court
Summaries for April 25, 2012
- Williams v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- White v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Viskup v. Viskup
Family Law- Scott v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Reed v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Pina v. Pina
Family Law, Real Estate & Property Law- Ortiz v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Muhammad v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- McNaughton v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Martin v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Manzano v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Kendrick v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Jackson v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Jackson v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law- Graham v. Graham
Family Law- Ennis v. Ennis
Family Law- Crisler et al. v. Haugabook et al.
Constitutional Law- Brown v. State
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Receive this and other FREE daily opinion summaries from Justia Williams v. State
Docket: S12A0594 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Benham
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant pled guilty to all crimes charged related to the attempted armed robbery and murder of the victim in the victim's restaurant. The court held that the trial court did not violate defendant's due process rights by sentencing him to life without parole. The court rejected defendant's contention that because he had just turned 20-years-old when he committed the crime, his sentence of life without parole constituted cruel and unusual punishment. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWC 
View Case on: Justia Google Scholar White v. State
Docket: S12A0440 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Benham
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant appealed his conviction for felony murder with the underlying felony being aggravated assault and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. Since it was not necessary in this case to instruct the jury on no duty to retreat in conjunction with defendant's sole defense of justification, the first prong of the State v. Kelly "plain error test" was not met. The court also held that the trial court did not err by accepting the jury's verdict where the jury was properly instructed. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWj View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Viskup v. Viskup
Docket: S12A0276 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Benham
Areas of Law: Family Law
In 2008, mother filed a petition for modification of custody and child support. After denying father's motion to dismiss for lack of venue, the trial court granted temporary physical custody of the child to mother in 2008 and permanent physical custody and child support in 2011. The court held that since there was evidence that supported the trial court's determination that father did not change his county of residence and was a resident of Cherokee County when mother filed her modification, the trial court did not misapply the law. Since there was evidence to support the trial court's award of custody of the child to one fit parent over the other fit parent, the court could not say that the trial court abused its discretion. Finally, to the extent that Harris v. Williams held that OCGA 19-9-3(g) did not authorize an award of attorney fees in an action seeking modification of child custody, it was overruled. Since mother's petition for modification of child custody did not fall within the parameters of OCGA 19-6-2(a) and fell within OCGA 19-9-3(g), the trial court's grant of attorney fees was pursuant to OCGA 19-9-3(g) and the court need not remand the case to the trial court for clarification of the statutory basis of its award. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWH View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Scott v. State
Docket: S12A0193 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Hines
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant appealed his convictions for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the fatal shooting of the victim. Defendant challenged his conviction on multiple grounds: that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts; that the prosecutor made improper statements in closing argument; that the trial court failed to cure the prejudice resulting from the prosecutor's improper statements; that a witness's immunity agreement was improperly sent to the jury during deliberations; that the trial court twice delivered improper Allen charges to the jury; that the trial court provided incomplete instructions regarding aggravated assault and the defense of alibi; that the trial court rendered ineffective assistance; and that the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial. The court found the challenges were without merit and affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWD View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Reed v. State
Docket: S12A0443 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Carley
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant was indicted for the malice murder of the victim, an alternative count of felony murder during the commission of aggravated assault, and the aggravated assault and battery of the victim's sister. After a jury trial, defendant was acquitted of malice murder and found guilty of the remaining counts. A motion for new trial was denied, but the trial court vacated the sentence for aggravated assault pursuant to a concession by the state. The court rejected defendant's claims on appeal that the felony murder count on the indictment failed to allege the essential elements of the predicate offense of aggravated assault; that the trail court erred in admitting evidence of a similar transaction; and that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWa View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Pina v. Pina
Docket: S12A0156 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Carley
Areas of Law: Family Law, Real Estate & Property Law
Wife and husband were married in 1998 and wife filed a complaint for divorce in 2008. The parties resolved all issues by agreement except the disposition of certain real property which was purchased by wife prior to the marriage. In 2005, wife transferred the property into a family trust for the benefit of her three children. Considering the lack of any evidence of the value of the maintenance work performed by husband, the testimony of wife that he was paid for this work, the fact that husband used a portion of the property rent-free as a commercial recording studio, and the fact that the property paid for the mortgage through its own rents, the trial court had evidentiary support for its finding that any increased value in the property attributable to husband's contributions and the expenditure of marital funds was nominal. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its broad discretion to divide the marital property equitably.
http://j.st/dWb View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Ortiz v. State
Docket: S12A0433 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Hunstein
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant was convicted of two counts of murder and related crimes in connection with the shooting deaths of two victims. Defendant appealed the denial of his motion for a new trial, alleging reversible error in certain jury instructions and in the trial court's failure to merge several of his convictions. The court found no error in the jury charge but vacated one count of aggravated assault, which should have been merged into the malice murder conviction.
http://j.st/dWu View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Muhammad v. State
Docket: S12A0180 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Melton
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant appealed his conviction for malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and tampering with evidence. Defendant contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict and the trial court erred by admitting similar transaction evidence. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to enable the jury to find defendant guilty of the crimes for which he was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of defendant's prior conviction for arson where the State offered the evidence to show defendant's bent of mind or course of conduct in using escalating degrees of violence toward women. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dW2 View Case on: Justia Google Scholar McNaughton v. State
Docket: S12A0322 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Thompson
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant was convicted of the malice murder and aggravated assault of his wife and sentenced to life in prison. Defendant appealed the denial of his motion for a new trial, asserting that the trial court erred by admitting similar transaction evidence and evidence of statements made by the victim regarding prior difficulties. The court concluded that any prejudice from the age of the similar transactions evidence at issue was outweighed by the probative value of the evidence. The court also concluded that there was no error in admitting the testimony of defendant's cell-mate because the evidence was sufficient to establish the required similarity between the charged crimes and the attack on the cellmate and was probative of defendant's bent of mind and course of conduct. The court did not err in permitting several witnesses to testify about the statements the victim made pertaining to prior difficulties between defendant and the victim where the hearsay testimony was either admissible under the necessity exception to the hearsay rule or its admission constituted harmless error. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWX View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Martin v. State
Docket: S12A0327 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Melton
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant appealed his conviction for felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a knife during the commission of a crime. The court rejected defendant's claims that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by introducing into evidence his videotaped statement to police without first redacting where he invoked his right to counsel and him asking God to have mercy on his soul; that the trial court erred by truncating his testimony that he was actually afraid of the victim and only acted in self-defense; that the trial court erred by not reading aloud to the jurors two stipulations agreed upon by the parties; that the trial court erred by failing to suppress his statement to an arresting officer that he had consumed seven alcoholic beverages on the night of the murder; and that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury regarding Miranda and the voluntariness of statements. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
http://j.st/dWe View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Manzano v. State
Docket: S12A0280 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Melton
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant was convicted of felony murder and acquitted of malice murder in connection with the shooting death of the victim. On appeal, defendant contended that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support the jury's verdict. The court affirmed the judgment and held that the evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find defendant guilty of felony murder beyond a reasonable doubt.
http://j.st/dWm View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Kendrick v. State
Docket: S12A0009 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Melton
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant appealed his conviction for felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, contending, among other things, that the trial court incorrectly charged the jury and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The court rejected defendant's claim of error regarding the jury charge where trial courts did not have to follow an exact formula in instructing juries so long as the charge as a whole ensured that the jury would consider whether the evidence of provocation and passion might authorize a verdict of voluntary manslaughter. The court also rejected defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel where defendant himself placed the evidence at issue before the jury and where trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance by failing to object to a proper argument. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.
http://j.st/dWd View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Jackson v. State
Docket: S12A0623 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Melton
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant appealed his conviction for malice murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, contending that a co-defendant's statement was introduced into evidence in violation of Crawford v. Washington. The State correctly conceded that the co-defendant's statement to police during the investigation of the victim's murder was testimonial in nature and that it was improperly admitted because defendant could not confront the co-defendant, who died before the trial commenced. Under the facts of the case, however, this Crawford violation was harmless where the co-defendant's statement was cumulative of other properly admitted evidence. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.
http://j.st/dWM View Case on: Justia Google Scholar Jackson v. State
Docket: S12A0784 Opinion Date: April 24, 2012 Judge: Thompson
Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Defendant was convicted of felony murder and other related offenses in connection with the shooting death of the victim. On appeal, defendant claimed that the trial court erred in denying his Batson challenge to the State's peremptory strikes during jury selection and violated his Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection rights relating to jury selection. The court held that a trial court's finding as to whether the opponent of a strike has proven discriminatory intent was entitled to great deference and would not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous. Applying this standard, defendant's contention that the State failed to give an adequate nondiscriminatory reason for striking Juror 24 was unpersuasive. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.
http://j.st/dWY View Case on: Justia Google Scholar
No comments:
Post a Comment