Glenn v. State

Demarquis Antonio Glenn was convicted by a jury of murdering Quentieria Knight, a co-worker he rode home with the night she disappeared. Police tracked Knight's car with a GPS device, found surveillance video of Glenn near the scene, and matched bullets from the crime scene to a gun found in his home during a search. Glenn appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia, arguing the search warrant for his home should never have been approved because the affidavit supporting it did not show a reasonable probability that evidence would be found there. The court explained that Glenn's motion to suppress that evidence had been filed and decided under an earlier version of his indictment, but his appeal was filed under a later, re-indicted case number. Because the transcript of the suppression hearing and the trial court's written ruling on it were never made part of the record for the case actually being appealed, the Supreme Court of Georgia had nothing to review on that issue. The court also independently confirmed the evidence was enough to support the conviction and affirmed the judgment.

Because the transcript of the suppression hearing and the trial court's written order on the motion to suppress were never made part of the appellate record for the operative indictment, there was nothing for the Supreme Court of Georgia to review, and the appellant bears the burden of ensuring the record is complete.

The decision is a reminder to criminal defense lawyers in Georgia that when a case is re-indicted, prior motions and rulings do not automatically carry over into the new record, and failing to renew or incorporate them can forfeit appellate review of important issues like suppressed evidence.

Affirmed

1. Georgia law reviews a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress evidence for abuse of discretion, meaning the appellate court asks only whether the trial judge's decision was within a reasonable range of choices.
2. Glenn's motion to suppress was filed, argued, and decided while an earlier version of his indictment was in effect, but he later filed his notice of appeal under a second, re-indicted case number.
3. Because the appellate record only contained documents tied to the second indictment, and the suppression hearing transcript and written ruling from the first indictment were never renewed or incorporated into the record for the second, those materials were missing from the case on appeal.
4. Georgia appellate practice places the burden on the person appealing to make sure the record is complete, and when it is not, there is simply nothing for the appellate court to examine on that claim.
5. Applying that rule here, the Supreme Court of Georgia had no transcript or order to review regarding the search warrant challenge, so it could not find any abuse of discretion and left the conviction intact.

• murder conviction
• motion to suppress
• search warrant
• incomplete appellate record
• re-indictment