State v. Cook

Billy Joe Cook was charged in 2018 with murdering his on-again/off-again girlfriend Leslie Adams, whose remains were found in 2007 nearly two years after she disappeared in 2005. A Gwinnett County judge struck one murder count (based on aggravated stalking) after finding the State hadn't shown a causal link between the stalking and the death, and separately ruled that cell phone records the State wanted to use at trial had not been properly authenticated under a specific evidence rule. The State appealed both rulings. The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the stalking-based murder count was legally adequate because it tracked the murder statute's language and alleged the required elements, so the judge was wrong to dismiss it. But as to the cell phone records ruling, the court found the State had no legal right to appeal because the order didn't actually exclude the evidence, it just meant the State would have to authenticate the records a different way.

A felony murder count that tracks the statutory language of OCGA § 16-5-1(c) and alleges the defendant caused the death during commission of a felony survives a general demurrer; and a pretrial order finding evidence inadequately authenticated under Rule 902(11) is not an appealable order excluding evidence unless excluding the evidence is a necessary consequence of that order.

The ruling lets prosecutors proceed with a stalking-based murder charge in a long-delayed cold case, showing how broadly indictments can be worded to survive early challenges. It also limits when prosecutors statewide can immediately appeal evidentiary rulings before trial.

Appeal dismissed in part and judgment reversed in part

1. A general demurrer challenges whether the indictment itself is legally sufficient, and it survives if the charge either recites the statute's language setting out all elements or alleges facts establishing a violation; courts review this question fresh, without deferring to the trial judge.
2. The felony murder count accused Cook of causing Adams's death while committing aggravated stalking, which mirrors the language of Georgia's felony murder statute (OCGA § 16-5-1(c)) and includes the key element that the defendant caused the victim's death, so the count was legally adequate and should not have been dismissed.
3. For the second ruling, the State needed a specific statutory right to appeal a pretrial order excluding evidence under OCGA § 5-7-1(a)(5); the court explained an order counts as 'excluding evidence' only if excluding the evidence is the order's necessary, built-in consequence, even if the order doesn't say so explicitly.
4. Failing to meet the shortcut authentication method under Rule 902(11) does not exclude evidence outright; it simply means the State must instead prove through other evidence, such as witness testimony, that the records are what they claim to be before using them at trial.
5. Because nothing in the record showed the State was actually barred from authenticating the cell phone records some other way, and the trial judge's own comments confirmed the ruling did not block the evidence entirely, the order did not meet the legal definition of 'excluding evidence,' so the State had no right to appeal it now.

• murder indictment
• general demurrer
• cold case investigation
• cell phone evidence authentication
• State's right to appeal