Georgia CommonsSearch every collection
Search Georgia Commons
Bills, Supreme Court opinions, the Code and the two constitutions, and House and Senate meeting transcripts, in one search. Ask in plain words: the search ranks passages by meaning as well as by their words.
Filters:Supreme Court of Georgia 2024 Clear filters
Found 72 matching documents.
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 11, 2024
Hill v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Newton County man's malice murder conviction for strangling his girlfriend, rejecting his challenges to the evidence, the trial court's handling of mistrial motions and jury selection, and his lawyer's performance.
(b) On appeal, Hill argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying each motion for mistrial, contending that each piece of testimony discussed above, individually and when viewed collectively, deprived him of a fair trial. “Whether to grant a motion for mistrial is within the trial court’s sound discretion, and the trial court’s exercise of...
9 Although, as noted above, trial counsel did not move to strike six of the jurors about which Hill complains in Division 4, Hill argues only that counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to move to strike five of those jurors; he does not include one of the jurors in this ineffective-assistance claim. so patently unreasonable that no competent...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · November 19, 2024
In THE MATTER OF ESTON WILLIAM HOOD, JR. (Two Cases)
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia suspended attorney Eston William Hood, Jr. for two years, rejecting a recommended one-year suspension as too lenient given his admitted false statements to opposing counsel, courtroom staff, and the State Bar itself.
We have carefully reviewed the entire record in this case and conclude that a one-year suspension is an insufficient level of discipline under the facts of this case. This Court has repeatedly recognized that “making false statements to the Bar during the disciplinary process is a very serious matter which typically results in, at least, a significant...
By virtue of his admission that he violated Rule 8.1 (a) in both SDBD Nos. 7407 and 7470, Hood has admitted that he knowingly made false statements to the Bar in his responses to two separate disciplinary matters. And, in addition, he admitted to violating Rule 8.4 (a) (4), which also involves engaging in professional conduct involving dishonesty, deceit,...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 15, 2024
Espinosa v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the denial of a man's request to withdraw his guilty plea for stabbing his girlfriend's 15-year-old son to death, rejecting his claim that his lawyer should have advised him of an insanity defense.
At the hearing, plea counsel testified that he had practiced in Georgia since 2007. He had worked both as a public defender and in private practice as a criminal defense attorney and had handled thousands of felony cases. Counsel explained the way he typically handled a murder case, i.e., meeting with the client, requesting discovery, taking discovery to...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · September 17, 2024
Gallegos-Munoz v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia clarified that a 1989 rule requiring judges to first find prior sexual-abuse accusations 'probably false' before letting a jury hear about them no longer applies under the state's 2013 Evidence Code.
(a) Our holdings in Smith. “The main issue on appeal” in Smith was “whether [former] OCGA § 24-2-3, commonly referred to as [Georgia’s] rape-shield law, bar[red] admission of testimony regarding the victim’s alleged past false accusations against persons other than the defendant.” Smith, 259 Ga. at 135-136. We held that the rape-shield statute, which is now...
evidence and did not prohibit such evidence, because prior- accusation evidence does not “concern[ ] the past sexual behavior of the complaining witness.” Id. at 120-121 (2). We held that this holding in Smith continued in force after the enactment of OCGA § 24-4-412 as part of the 2013 Evidence Code. Burns II, 306 Ga. at 120-121 (2). This was because...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · July 2, 2024
In the Matter of Curtis Lee Allen
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia rejected an attorney's request to match a ten-day Florida suspension because he failed to attach key Florida disciplinary documents and did not prove he had stopped practicing law during that suspension.
when an attorney requests entry of a suspension or voluntary surrender order nunc pro tunc, it is the lawyer’s responsibility to demonstrate that they voluntarily stopped practicing law, the date on which their law practice ended, and that they complied with all the ethical obligations implicated in such a decision, such as assisting clients in securing new...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · April 16, 2024
In the Matter of Paul Jason York
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia rejected a lawyer's proposed three-year suspension for forging a judge's and prosecutor's signatures, finding it improper to let him resume practicing law while related felony forgery charges remain pending.
substance abuse problems have been addressed, (b) providing proof that he is in compliance with the PDA, and (c) providing proof that he complied with his obligations to attend counseling and support meetings pursuant to the second condition. Moreover, the Special Master noted that if York is convicted of a crime arising from the same facts as this...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 29, 2024
Worth County School District v. Tibbetts
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a Worth County teacher's contract offer was valid under state law, meaning his failure to sign it on time left him with no written contract and no basis to sue the school district.
This Court has held that a contract term setting employee compensation is sufficiently definite where it is based on a method or formula for determining the exact amount of compensation. See Arby’s, Inc. v. Cooper, 265 Ga. 240, 241 (454 SE2d 488) (1995) (recognizing that “[t]o be enforceable, a promise of future compensation must be made at the beginning of...
Although the State Salary Schedule for the upcoming school year had not yet been published when the District offered Tibbetts his contract, the schedule from the prior year was still in effect. Moreover, the contract expressly provided that Tibbetts’s salary “may be subject to adjustment according to the anticipated budget for the 2019-2020 school year and...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 29, 2024
SMITH v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a $1 million civil forfeiture case against a metal recycling family must go back for further review because the State's complaint did not properly spell out the crime of theft by taking.
3. In the second certiorari question, we asked if the Court of Appeals erred in holding that, because the intent element of theft by taking could be inferred from the allegations of the second amended complaint, the second amended complaint satisfied OCGA § 9-16-12 (a)’s requirement that the complaint allege the essential elements of the offense. As...
We begin our construction of OCGA § 9-16-12 (a) by noting that the provision, which was enacted in 2015, see Ga. L. 2015, pp. 693, 702, 753, §§ 1-1, 4-1 (effective July 1, 2015), was modeled on a statutory precursor in the Criminal Code. That statutory precursor provided that an in rem forfeiture complaint must “allege the essential elements of the...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · December 10, 2024
Sumrall v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld the denial of a DeKalb County man's decades-late request for retroactive first-offender treatment, ruling he never got the prosecutor's required consent before filing and that the law does not violate his constitutional rights.
320 Ga. 617 FINAL COPY S24A1368. SUMRALL v. THE STATE.
every reasonable construction must be resorted to in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality. This approach not only reflects the prudential concern that constitutional issues not be needlessly confronted, but also recognizes that the legislature, like this Court, is bound by and swears an oath to uphold the Constitution. The courts will therefore...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 15, 2024
In the Matter of Curtis Lee Allen
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia accepted a Florida-based lawyer's corrected request for reciprocal discipline, imposing a ten-day suspension backdated to match his earlier Florida suspension and reinstating him immediately.
Based on those facts, Allen requested, as substantially similar discipline, that this Court suspend his license to practice law in Georgia for ten days, nunc pro tunc and concurrent with his ten-day Florida suspension, and that the Court allow his reinstatement upon the entry of its opinion. But this Court rejected his original petition because Allen...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · March 5, 2024
Jennings v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Savanna Jennings's murder conviction for helping orchestrate the killing of her grandfather, rejecting her claims about improper evidence and ineffective defense lawyering.
(i) Jennings contends that her trial counsel performed deficiently by failing to preserve her objection to the exclusion of Lieutenant Scott’s testimony, but as shown above, Jennings preserved her objection. Thus, we conclude that counsel did not perform deficiently. See Salvesen, 317 Ga. at 321 (4). (ii) Pretermitting whether Jennings’s trial counsel...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · March 5, 2024
McCullum v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Samuel Earl McCullum's convictions for the 1998 rape and murder of Monica Blackwell and the 1999 rape of another woman, rejecting his arguments that the evidence was insufficient and that pretrial delay and joinder violated his rights.
7 In Musacchio v. United States, 577 U.S. 237 (136 SCt 709, 193 LE2d 639) (2016), the United States Supreme Court reiterated that, under Jackson v. Virginia, a challenge to the constitutional sufficiency of the evidence looks to “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the pros- ecution, any rational trier of fact could have found...
MCMILLIAN, Justice, dissenting in part. Under the well-established standard of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979), this Court deter- mines whether evidence is sufficient as a matter of constitutional due process by examining whether “any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · August 13, 2024
In the Matter of Anthony O. Van Johnson
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia accepted an Atlanta-area attorney's voluntary surrender of his law license after he admitted forging a client's signature on a settlement check, keeping her money, and abandoning other clients' cases.
5 Rule 8.4 (a) (4) provides that it shall be a violation of the Rules for a lawyer to “engage in professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” own use; and when he requested that his bank stop payment on the check he had written to Client One before she could deposit it. With regard to SDBD No. 7811, Van Johnson admits that...
3 Rule 1.15 (I) provides: (a) A lawyer shall hold funds or other property of clients or third persons that are in a lawyer’s possession in connection with a representation separate from the lawyer’s own funds or other property. Funds shall be kept in one or more separate accounts maintained in an approved institution as defined by Rule 1.15 (III) (c) (1)....
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 1, 2024
In THE MATTER OF JOHN L.G. HERBERT, JR. (Four Cases)
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia disbarred attorney John L. G. Herbert, Jr. after he defaulted on disciplinary charges accusing him of taking about $850,000 entrusted to him by overseas real estate investors.
2 This Rule provides, in pertinent part, that “a lawyer shall . . . keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter . . . [and] promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.” 3 This Rule provides that “[a] lawyer shall not make an agreement for, charge, or collect an unreasonable fee or an unreasonable amount for expenses,”...
11 This Rule provides: (1) A lawyer shall designate all trust accounts, whether general or specific, as well as all deposit slips and checks drawn thereon, as an “Attorney Trust Account,” “Attorney Escrow Account” “IOLTA Account” or “Attorney Fiduciary Account.” The name of the attorney or law firm responsible for the account shall also appear on all...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 22, 2024
BAKER v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld the murder convictions of Prentice Baker and Verlaine Laguerre, rejecting arguments that jurors needed a special warning about a witness who may have been an accomplice and that a lawyer's failure to object to fearful testimony was ineffective.
2 Baker’s counsel attacked Ellis’s credibility at length, referred to Wimby’s testimony that Ellis “set [the murder] up,” and characterized Ellis as “a potential suspect” during opening statements and closing arguments. And in closing argument, Laguerre’s counsel told the jury that “nothing that [Ellis] says should make you feel good about making a decision...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 11, 2024
Eleby v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Lamar County man's murder-related convictions from a deadly home invasion, but ordered his armed robbery and conspiracy convictions vacated because they should have merged into other convictions.
In addition, contrary to Appellant’s contention, the trial court did not err in sentencing Appellant for the separate assaults of Holmes and Johnson, as those counts do not merge with each other. See Sillah v. State, 315 Ga. 741, 758 (883 SE2d 756) (2023) (“If crimes are committed against different victims . . . , they do not merge.”). Finally, Appellant...
3. Relying solely on the non-binding, solo concurrence by Justice Stevens in Ball v. United States, 470 U.S. 856, 867-868 (105 SCt 1668, 84 LE2d 740) (1985), Appellant argues that double jeopardy concerns prohibited his prosecution on the multi-count or “multiplicitous” indictment in this case. This claim, however, is without merit. First, the majority in...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 6, 2024
In THE MATTER OF TIMOTHY ORMAN MCCALEP (Two Cases)
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia disbarred attorney Timothy Orman McCalep after finding he repeatedly abandoned clients in criminal and divorce cases, kept their fees, and let unlicensed staff mishandle their cases.
In SDBD Nos. 7641 and 7642, a mother hired McCalep in November 2021 to represent her son in a criminal matter. By March 2022, the grievants had paid McCalep over $18,000, including $5,000 for a bond hearing. McCalep purported to waive the son’s 9 Rule 1.1 requires lawyers to “provide competent representation to a client.” Rule 1.2 (a) requires lawyers to...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · December 10, 2024
HOLLIS v. CITY OF LAGRANGE
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a constitutional limit on the legislature's power over municipal utility rates does not stop courts from reviewing lawsuits claiming those rates are actually illegal taxes.
v. Ga. Dept. of Revenue, 301 Ga. 354, 356 (801 SE2d 9) (2017) (citation omitted). The constitutional provision at issue here—Paragraph V (d)— is part of Article III (titled “Legislative Branch”), Section VI (titled “Exercise of Powers”) of the Georgia Constitution. Paragraph V (d) expressly restricts the power of “[t]he General Assembly” to “regulate or fix...
City from assessing and collecting “such illegal tax.” In March 2023, the City filed an answer to the complaint, generally denying that its utilities charges were “illegal taxes,” and in May 2023, the City filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. At a hearing on the motion, the City argued that the trial court was not authorized to regulate municipal...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 20, 2024
WOODS v. BARNES (Two Cases)
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that Fannin County teachers cannot use the state's Impairment Clause to challenge the loss of job protections that came when their school system converted to a charter system, because those protections had already been limited by a 1993 law long before the conversion.
The Charter Schools Act of 1998 repealed and replaced the 1993 law. See Ga. L. 1998, pp. 1080, 1082, §§ 1, 3. Like the 1993 law, however, the 1998 law authorized individual public schools to convert into public charter schools governed by a “performance based [charter] contract approved by both state and local boards of education.” Ga. L. 1998, p. 1082, §...
Then, in 2007, the General Assembly passed the Charter Systems Act, which amended the Charter Schools Act to provide that local public school systems could convert into public charter systems, meaning that charter conversion was available for entire systems of schools and was no longer limited to individual schools. See Ga. L. 2007, pp. 185, 188, § 5. The...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · July 2, 2024
In the Matter of Susan Michele Brown
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia rejected a petition by attorney Susan Brown to accept discipline for her conduct as a trust administrator, ruling that the ethics rules she supposedly violated do not reach a lawyer acting purely as a fiduciary outside the practice of law.
That concern is implicated here, where the Bar concedes that Brown was not engaged in the practice of law and nonetheless seeks discipline on the basis of Rules 1.15 (I) (c) and 1.15 (II) (b), which purport to apply not only to a lawyer’s handling of funds and other property that are in her possession in connection with a legal representation of a...
In this case, however, we need not decide whether applying Rules 1.15 (I) (c) and 1.15 (II) (b) to Brown’s conduct could require an exercise of this Court’s authority that would exceed its constitutional limits, because we can apply the canon of constitutional doubt to interpret those Rules. “Under the canon of constitutional doubt, if a statute is...
Narrow the results
Counts are of the documents this search found.