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:2020 Clear filters
Found 298 matching passages in 150 documents.
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 14, 2020
BARROW v. RAFFENSPERGER (Two Cases)
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger properly canceled the 2020 election for Justice Keith Blackwell's seat, because Blackwell's accepted resignation guarantees a vacancy that will erase the term voters would have been electing someone to fill.
(b) Beskin’s case is not moot. At the hearing held by the trial court, the Secretary argued that Beskin’s claims were moot because she had qualified as a candidate in the May 19 election for Justice Bethel’s office and thus had availed herself of an adequate alternative remedy to the mandamus relief that she was requesting. In response, Beskin asserted that...
In Beskin’s case, however, we need not decide whether her qualifying for the election for Justice Bethel’s office constituted an adequate alternative remedy to her qualifying for the election for Justice Blackwell’s office, or whether having qualified for the election for Justice Bethel’s office, OCGA § 21-2-136 would preclude her from withdrawing her...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · April 6, 2020
Srm Group, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a business sued in court can seek attorney fees for bad-faith litigation even when its counterclaim was one it was legally required to bring, not just when it was optional.
1. Background. The facts, as set forth by the Court of Appeals, are as follows: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Travelers”) filed suit against SRM Group, Inc. (“SRM”), seeking to recover unpaid premiums due under a workers’ compensation insurance policy. In response, SRM asserted counterclaims against Travelers for breach of contract,...
4. With Byers set aside, and given our determination in Division 2, it is clear that SRM was entitled to seek attorney fees under OCGA § 13-6-11, as it asserted independent claims for breach 6 We also disapprove of Maree v. ROMAR Joint Venture, 329 Ga. App. 282, 297 (6) (d) n.18 (763 SE2d 899) (2014); and Murtagh v. Emory Univ., 321 Ga. App. 411, 417 (3)...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · April 6, 2020
Martin v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Marquez Deshawn Martin's convictions for two murders committed during robberies, rejecting his claim that his lawyer should have fought harder over jury instructions, but sent the case back because he was wrongly sentenced on four murder counts instead of two.
5 During the charge conference, the trial court proposed an instruction that did not include the additional language Martin’s counsel had requested, noting that it had “cut some of the stuff in that charge,” but inviting Martin’s counsel to provide different language. Both Martin’s counsel and the prosecutor declined, and the court charged the jury with the...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 29, 2020
Raines v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a judge, not a jury, can decide whether a person who committed murder as a teenager is so 'irreparably corrupt' that he can be sentenced to life without parole.
To that end, it is undisputed that in interpreting the Eighth Amendment, the United States Supreme Court has held that a sentence of death cannot be imposed on a juvenile. Roper, 543 U.S. at 578. And although it has not held that a sentence of life without parole is barred categorically for juvenile offenders, it has, through Miller, “rendered life without...
In other words, although the Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment precedents impose separate constitutional restrictions on the types of punishment that may be imposed on a juvenile, they do not answer whether OCGA § 16-5-1 (e) (1) satisfies the Sixth Amendment. Indeed, they do not speak to what punishment a state statute authorizes for a given offense or...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · August 10, 2020
Arnold v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a man's murder conviction for shooting a Chevron gas station customer, rejecting his claim that his lawyer should have objected to parts of the prosecutor's closing argument.
It is not improper for a prosecutor to argue that a jury should send a message to the community by convicting a defendant. See Poellnitz v. State, 296 Ga. 134, 136 (3) (765 SE2d 343) (2014) (“[I]t is not improper for a prosecutor to appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community or to argue to the jury the necessity for enforcement of the law...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · December 21, 2020
In the Matter of Christopher John Palazzola
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia suspended Atlanta attorney Christopher Palazzola from practicing law, but since he had already voluntarily stopped practicing on June 1, 2020, the suspension was backdated and he was immediately reinstated with conditions requiring a law practice management review.
(b) Imposition of the suspension nunc pro tunc. In a motion filed in this Court after the Review Board’s report was issued and the matter returned here, Palazzola asked that we impose any discipline nunc pro tunc to June 1, 2020, the date on which the motion baldly asserted that he closed his law practice. As the State Bar pointed out in its response to his...
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is back before this Court on the report and recommendation of the State Disciplinary Review Board, which reviewed the report and recommendation issued by Special Master S. Jeffrey Rusbridge at the request of the respondent attorney, Christopher John Palazzola (State Bar No. 559321), pursuant to Bar Rule 4-216 (d).1 While...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · August 10, 2020
Hood v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Diara Hood's felony murder and related convictions for luring two men into an ambush robbery, but found the trial court made two sentencing errors that should be corrected.
3. Hood also asserts that the trial court erred when charging the jury on other-acts evidence by instructing that the State was required to prove motive. Specifically, before any witness testified about the November 2013 robbery and again as part of its final charge to the jury, the trial court instructed the jury as follows: In order to prove its case in...
Records from Carden’s phone showed multiple communications on July 29 with a phone number that investigators linked to Hood. At 2:59 a.m., Carden texted “OK almost there,” and at 3:08 a.m., he texted, “At shell one on the ritd [sic].” And in the three hours before his death, Carden continued to make and receive 27 calls and numerous text messages to and...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · April 20, 2020
Williams v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Fulton County man's murder conviction, ruling his trial lawyer was not ineffective for failing to argue the death was accidental during consensual erotic asphyxiation.
Because, as the trial court implicitly found, Williams never told Fair about engaging in erotic asphyxiation, Fair did not act unreasonably when he did not investigate or develop on his own this not-so-obvious line of defense. See Strickland, 466 U. S. at 691 (III) (A) (explaining that the reasonableness of trial counsel’s investigation decisions “depends...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · April 6, 2020
Frazier v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Washington County man's felony murder conviction, ruling that jurors could reasonably find he was a party to an attempted armed robbery that led to his accomplice's fatal shooting.
To convict Appellant of felony murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, the State was not required to prove that he personally fired the shot that killed Griner, only that Appellant was a party to the crimes, meaning that he intentionally aided or abetted in the commission of the crimes or intentionally advised, encouraged,...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 16, 2020
Heard v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed a Clayton County man's murder and armed robbery convictions, ruling that jurors should never have heard evidence that he committed an unrelated carjacking and kidnapping months later.
The similar (but not unique) features of the charged and uncharged crimes in this case are undermined by the major differences between them. See Lail, supra (holding that the “major dissimilarities” between the charged and uncharged bank robberies were “more striking” than the four similarities between them, none of which could be called a “signature”...
(g) Harm. Based on the discussion above, we conclude that the State failed to show a relevant purpose for the other acts evidence; the trial court therefore abused its discretion by admitting that evidence under Rule 404 (b). The trial court’s evidentiary error requires reversal of Appellant’s convictions unless it can be deemed harmless, meaning that “‘it...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · December 7, 2020
Thrift v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a Ware County man's felony murder conviction in the 1991 disappearance of his cousin, ruling that his repeated confessions to killing the victim were enough evidence even though no body was ever found.
8. Thrift also argues that the trial court erred by restricting his counsel’s cross-examination of a State’s witness concerning statements Rouse made prior to his disappearance that he was going to disappear because he owed money for drugs. During the cross-examination of one of the State’s witnesses, who was a friend of both Rouse and Thrift, Thrift’s...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 18, 2020
JACKSON v. RAFFENSPERGER
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia revived a lactation consultant's lawsuit against Georgia's licensing law, ruling that the Georgia Constitution protects a right to work in one's chosen profession and that similarly qualified lactation consultants may be treated as equals under the law.
CLCs work in many settings, including in people’s homes. CLCs are spread across Georgia and are therefore more available to rural Georgians and minority Georgians than are IBCLCs, who are concentrated in metro Atlanta and other urban areas and often are nurses and other healthcare professionals who lack the time to provide full-time breastfeeding support to...
The General Assembly acknowledges that the application of specific knowledge and skills relating to breastfeeding is important to the health of mothers and babies and acknowledges further that the rendering of sound lactation care and services in hospitals, physician practices, private homes, and other settings requires trained and competent professionals....
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 10, 2020
CITY OF ATLANTA v. ATLANTA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL SYSTEM
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that Atlanta Public Schools' lawsuit over a small City of Atlanta annexation was not a real legal dispute the courts could decide, because the annexed property had no effect on the school system.
Though the 1950 LCA continued under the Georgia Constitution of 1976, the 1983 Constitution prohibited any future local amendments. In addition, pre-existing local amendments were required to be re-adopted by local legislation, without being further amended, prior to July 1, 1987, and, if not, they would be deemed to be “repealed and . . . deleted” by...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 19, 2020
Hill v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Otis Hill's murder, attempted murder, and kidnapping convictions in the killing of Christina Wellington and shooting of Marshall Wellington, but corrected two sentencing errors where lesser charges should have merged.
Hill’s characterization of the court’s instructions is not supported by the record. Before trial, the court provided the jurors with notepads and pencils and instructed the jurors that they were allowed, but not required, to take notes. The court instructed the jurors from the pattern jury instructions:3 The notes you take are for your use only and are not...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · December 21, 2020
Armstrong v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld Jhakeem Armstrong's murder conviction, ruling that gang evidence used to establish his motive was properly admitted and that any related errors did not affect the trial's outcome.
PETERSON, Justice. Jhakeem Armstrong appeals his conviction for malice murder for the death of Robert Parrish, Jr. (“Parrish”).1 He argues that the
310 Ga. 598 FINAL COPY S20A1364. ARMSTRONG v. THE STATE.
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 18, 2020
San Miguel Produce, Inc. v. L.G. Herndon Jr. Farms, Inc
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia answered three certified questions about Georgia's agricultural dealer licensing law, ruling that a produce company acting as a dealer must be licensed and that failing to get a license can bar it from enforcing a business contract in court.
Moreover, given the significant and undisputed role that agriculture plays in the economy of Georgia, as well as the interest of all citizens of Georgia in a reliable and cost-effective food supply, legislation to ensure that Georgia farmers are protected in their transactions with dealers is regulation in the public interest. Like the similar federal PACA,...
According to the district court’s order, many of the parties’ claims have been abandoned, and the remaining claims asserted by Herndon Farms concern two alleged breaches of the GSA by San Miguel: failing to pay invoices on delivered produce and inducing Herndon Farms to grow produce before terminating the GSA. San Miguel’s remaining claims, apart from a...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · February 10, 2020
State v. Williams
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia reinstated a man's aggravated sexual battery conviction, ruling that although the trial judge gave a legally wrong jury instruction about a young child's ability to consent, the mistake did not affect the trial's outcome given the strength of the evidence.
subsequent decisions in Duncan and Laster, we agree with the Court of Appeals that the trial court’s instruction on underage consent was clearly erroneous when coupled with the charge on aggravated sexual battery. In Watson, we recognized that lack of consent was a textual element of the crime of sexual battery. 297 Ga. at 719. We also determined that the...
BENHAM, Justice. We granted a writ of certiorari to determine whether the Court of Appeals correctly reversed Kenneth Howard Williams’ conviction for aggravated sexual battery (OCGA § 16-6-22.21) based on its conclusion that the trial court gave an erroneous charge to the jury concerning an underage victim’s capacity to consent. The parties addressed the...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · May 18, 2020
Hood v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia upheld a DeKalb County man's felony murder conviction, ruling that his trial lawyer's decision not to consult a gunshot residue expert did not deprive him of a fair trial.
And fourth, Hood contends that Robinson could have explained that a self-inflicted gunshot wound was possible given McGriff’s arm length, the length of the weapon used, “and the presence of visible particles in the sweater.” But that argument is greatly undercut by Robinson’s own testimony that he had “no issues” with Investigator Gochenouer’s distance...
In sum, given the strong evidence of Hood’s guilt, it is not reasonably probable that the outcome of the trial would have been different even if Robinson had testified at trial. That is because three of the four points from Robinson’s testimony that Hood highlights were either already made by trial counsel; consistent with the State’s expert testimony; or...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 19, 2020
Gray v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that a trial judge keeps the power to modify a criminal sentence under Georgia's sentence-modification law even if the judge rules after the one-year deadline, as long as the request to modify was filed within that year.
Moreover, we disagree with the Court of Appeals that the legislature rejected the common-law rule because the legislature did not expressly write the common-law rule into the current version of the statute. See Gray, 351 Ga. App. at 706. Although the legislature was aware of and could have codified the common-law rule, we cannot assume that omitting the...
2. The central issue in this case is whether a trial court retains jurisdiction under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f) to modify a sentence when the motion to modify was filed within the one-year time limit. “[W]e first look to the text because a statute draws its meaning from its text.” Stubbs v. Hall, 308 Ga. 354, 363 (4) (840 SE2d 407) (2020) (citation and punctuation...
Supreme Court opinion · Supreme Court of Georgia · September 8, 2020
Butler v. State
Summary by Georgia Commons (AI-written): The Supreme Court of Georgia found that the evidence at trial was enough to convict Patrick Butler of murder, but vacated his convictions because the trial judge used the wrong legal test when allowing prosecutors to bring up his old obstruction conviction.
As to prejudice, on the one hand, the prior conviction and the State’s questioning — asking whether Appellant committed violence against a police officer just doing his job — raised the risk that the jury would make the highly prejudicial and forbidden inference that when Appellant shot the victim, he must have been acting in conformity with his violent...
Narrow the results
Counts are of the documents this search found.