--- title: Perry, Warden v. Blevins collection: opinions id: S25A0089 cite_as: Perry, Warden v. Blevins, 321 Ga. 587 (2025) canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0089 md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0089.md text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0089/text source_url: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10680459/perry-warden-v-blevins/ date: 2025-05-06 status: published corpus_version: opinions-2026-09-14 license: Public record of the Supreme Court of Georgia, via CourtListener and the court's own website; see about.md publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice. up: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/2025.md previous: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0410.md next: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0363.md index: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/index.md omitted: opinion extras omitted_chars: 1837 omitted_url: https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0089.md?full=1 docket: S25A0089 citation: 321 Ga. 587 court: Supreme Court of Georgia case_type: habeas authoring_justice: Pinson disposition: Affirmed vote: Peterson, C.J., Warren, P.J., and LaGrua and Colvin, JJ., concur; Bethel, Ellington, and McMillian, JJ., disqualified word_count: 355 date_filed_source: courtlistener citations: - 915 S.E.2d 602 record_source: courtlistener legal_areas: - criminal law - habeas corpus - civil procedure upstream_id: "10680459" summaries_model: claude-sonnet-5 --- # Perry, Warden v. Blevins Supreme Court of Georgia, docket S25A0089, filed 2025-05-06, 321 Ga. 587. ## Opinion 321 Ga. 587 FINAL COPY S25A0089. PERRY v. BLEVINS. PINSON, Justice. A jury found Thomas Blevins guilty of a number of crimes in connection with the sexual assault of B. P. Blevins appealed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. See Blevins v. State, 343 Ga. App. 539 (808 SE2d 740) (2017). Blevins then filed a petition for habeas corpus in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County. The ha- beas court granted the writ, and the warden timely appealed that decision to this Court. The warden raises several claims of error with respect to some of the reasons the habeas court gave for granting relief. These claims may well have merit. But the warden has not challenged certain other grounds that supported the habeas court’s grant of relief. Those grounds include the habeas court’s determinations that Blevins’s counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance by failing to investigate victims, failing to investigate juror irregulari- ties, failing to investigate exculpatory evidence, failing to research the law of evidence, and failing to question the State’s proof at trial. We have made clear before that an appellant’s “failure to at- tack alternative bases for a judgment results in the affirmance of that judgment.” Brown v. Fokes Props. 2002, Inc., 283 Ga. 231, 233 (2) (657 SE2d 820) (2008) (cleaned up). In such an appeal, even if the appellate court were to address the claims the appellant raised and agree that they established error, that decision would have no effect on an underlying judgment supported by other bases not properly put before the court for review. Just so here. We are therefore con- strained to affirm the judgment below. See id. Judgment affirmed. Peterson, C. J., Warren, P. J., and LaGrua and Colvin, JJ, concur. Bethel, Ellington, and McMillian, JJ., disqualified. Decided May 6, 2025 — Reconsideration denied May 28, 2025. Habeas corpus. Gwinnett Superior Court. Before Judge Ad- kins. Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Beth A. Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Meghan H. Hill, Michael A. Oldham, Senior As- sistant Attorneys General, for appellant. Peters Rubin Sheffield & Hodges, Jason B. Sheffield, Linda S. Sheffield; Christine A. Koehler, for appellee. ## Summaries written by Georgia Commons The following was written by claude-sonnet-5 from the opinion above and is not part of the court's opinion. Quote the opinion, not the summary. The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Gwinnett County judge's order granting habeas relief to a man convicted of sexual assault, because the state's appeal failed to challenge all the reasons the habeas court gave for its ruling. ### Plain-language summary Thomas Blevins was convicted by a jury of sexually assaulting a victim identified as B.P., and the Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed his convictions. Blevins later filed a habeas corpus petition, a legal challenge to the legality of his imprisonment, in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County. The habeas court agreed with him and ordered a new trial, finding that his trial lawyer had failed him in several ways, including not investigating victims, jurors, and evidence, and not researching the law or challenging the state's proof at trial. The prison warden appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court of Georgia, but only challenged some of the habeas court's reasons for granting relief, leaving other independent grounds unchallenged. Because those other grounds were enough on their own to support the ruling, the Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the habeas court's decision without even reaching the merits of the reasons the warden did contest. ### Holding, as summarized When a trial court's ruling rests on multiple independent grounds and the appealing party challenges only some of them, the appellate court must affirm because a decision on the challenged grounds alone could not change the outcome, given the unchallenged grounds still support the judgment. ### Disposition Affirmed. Peterson, C.J., Warren, P.J., and LaGrua and Colvin, JJ., concur; Bethel, Ellington, and McMillian, JJ., disqualified. ### Why it matters The ruling means Blevins's convictions remain overturned and he may get a new trial. It also reminds government lawyers and litigants statewide that an appeal must challenge every independent basis for a ruling, or the ruling will stand regardless of the merits of the arguments actually raised. > The summarized reasoning, checked quotes, suggested questions, and the CourtListener opinion records (1,837 characters) are at https://georgiacommons.org/opinions/S25A0089.md?full=1