Oral Argument Preview: October 22

The Court will hear oral argument in six cases next Tuesday. The archived oral argument will be available to watch here.

Reed v. The State

A man convicted of murder is seeking a new trial, asserting ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to object to the admission of inculpatory statements made at the police station.


Williams v. Dekalb County

A Dekalb County taxpayer is seeking to invalidate the Dekalb Board of Commissioners' vote to give itself a pay raise in February of last year. The board added the pay increase to the meeting as a "walk-on" item, failing to mention it in the published agenda each of the three weeks leading up to the meeting.

Williams sued the county, claiming (1) the board violated the Open Meetings Act by not giving proper notice of their intent to pass the pay increase, and (2) the act of the General Assembly giving the county power to increase their pay violated the Georgia Constitution. The trial court dismissed, holding (1) he could not adjudicate the claims without a certified copy of the salary ordinance in the record, that (2) Williams lacked standing, that (3) Williams failed to state a claim, and (4) the remainder of the claims were barred complaint based on sovereign, legislative, and official immunity.

Williams is represented by the University of Georgia Appellate Litigation clinic.


Georgia Department of Public Safety v. Ragsdale

The State is appealing the Georgia Court of Appeals ruling that a lawsuit against the Department of Public Safety can go forward. The plaintiff was injured in a car accident with a suspect who was fleeing pursuit by law enforcement.

The dispute before the Court next week revolves around Ragsdale's ante-litem notice: i.e. the requirement that a person contemplating suing the state give notice of his intent to sue in writing within 12 months of the date the loss was or should have been discovered. OCGA 50-21-26(a)(1).

Ragsdale initially sent an ante litem notice within the time limit, but dismissed and refiled it after learning that he had failed to include all the required information. The trial court denied the state's motion to dismiss, holding that the ante litem notice was not untimely because OCGA 9-3-99 tolls the running of a period of limitations for a plaintiff whose tort claim derives from a crime “from the date of the alleged crime . . .  until the prosecution of such crime or act has become final or otherwise terminated.” The state argues that the tolling provision does not apply because the ante litem notice is not a statute of limitations, and any Court of Appeals caselaw to the contrary should be overruled.

For more information, see our coverage of the cert petition in Ragsdale.


Calhoun v. The State

An ineffective assistance of counsel case involving the felony murder conviction of a man who was fleeing police when his car flipped over, killing his young female passenger.


Mcelrath v. The State

A sufficiency of the evidence case dealing with whether a jury could have found that the defendant was not insane under Georgia Code § 16-3-3.


The State v. Hamilton

The State is appealing a ruling that a woman who was previously convicted of murdering her ex-husband, then granted a new trial, is now immune from prosecution.