Legal News- Marietta Attorneys Dean Phillips Law Office

Treatment Instead of Incarceration

October 17, 2016 No Comments

The opening of The Zone in Marietta, Georgia, marks a community-wide shift toward treatment instead of incarceration. Supported by Cobb County’s District Attorney and Attorney General, the Davis Direction Foundation created this recovery center to help individuals struggling with heroin and opioid addiction rebuild their lives. The Zone offers programs like music therapy, yoga, social support, and scholarships — all designed to promote long-term recovery and reduce relapse. This initiative shows how Cobb County continues to prioritize rehabilitation over punishment for addiction-related struggles.

Georgia’s Supreme Court Reviews Child Custody Case

October 10, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Supreme Court has reaffirmed a Cobb County Superior Court decision that awarded custody of three children to their maternal grandparents. The ruling came after the Georgia Court of Appeals initially reversed the trial court’s decision, returning custody to the mother. The Supreme Court determined that the Appeals Court disregarded substantial evidence supporting the grandparents’ suitability, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based custody rulings in Georgia courts.

Surveillance: Orwellian Situation or Acceptable Means

September 27, 2016 No Comments

A Cobb County jury may soon determine whether placing a GPS tracking device on someone’s vehicle is an invasion of privacy or a lawful investigative method. The lawsuit, involving a Loganville mother of three, raises questions about Georgia’s surveillance laws and personal privacy.

The woman’s attorney argues that people should have a reasonable expectation of privacy from secret tracking, while the private investigator’s lawyer insists it’s a standard investigative tool. As Georgia law currently lacks clarity on GPS tracking, this Cobb County case could influence future interpretations of O.C.G.A. § 16-11-62 and shape how far investigators can go in gathering evidence.

When Is a Robbery Attempt Not a Robbery Attempt?

September 27, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Court of Appeals reversed an armed robbery conviction from Cherokee County Superior Court, finding that the defendant’s actions did not meet the legal threshold for an attempted robbery under O.C.G.A. § 16-4-1.

The case involved a man who entered a pharmacy wearing a mask and carried suspicious notes suggesting intent, but no weapon was found and no robbery occurred. The Court ruled that these actions represented preparation rather than an actual attempt, a key distinction in Georgia criminal law.

This decision underscores the importance of understanding “substantial steps” vs. “mere preparation” in criminal attempt cases — and how a skilled Georgia criminal defense attorney can challenge evidence that doesn’t meet the burden of proof.

Recusal of Prosecutor Weighed by Appeals Court of Georgia

September 26, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Court of Appeals overturned a Cobb County trial court decision in a case involving the recusal of a solicitor general. The defendant had objected to the prosecutor’s voluntary withdrawal, claiming no conflict of interest existed and that the recusal occurred without a hearing or her consent.

The Court of Appeals clarified that under Georgia law, a criminal defendant cannot object to a prosecutor’s voluntary recusal. The court also found that the trial judge lacked authority to override the Attorney General’s reassignment of the case to another county’s solicitor’s office.

This decision reinforces how Georgia courts handle conflicts of interest and prosecutorial discretion, ensuring fair and impartial case assignments in the state’s legal system.

Georgia’s Appeals Court Explains Recidivist Sentencing

September 26, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld a Cobb County Superior Court decision in a case involving recidivist sentencing after an armed robbery conviction. The defendant challenged the trial court’s use of recorded jail phone calls and claimed his attorney failed to object properly to the sentencing enhancement.

The Appeals Court ruled that the trial court acted correctly, determining the defendant’s prior Michigan offense qualified him as a recidivist under Georgia law. The Court also rejected the defendant’s claims of ineffective counsel, noting that the attorney’s performance was reasonable and that no objections would have changed the outcome.

This ruling highlights how prior out-of-state convictions can impact sentencing and underscores the importance of experienced legal representation in Georgia criminal cases.

Timeliness of Jury Oath Paves Way for New Trial

September 26, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld a Cobb County trial court’s decision to grant a new trial in a DUI case due to a jury oath error.
The defendant argued that the judge administered the juror’s oath only after deliberations had begun, violating the procedure required under O.C.G.A. § 15-12-139.

The Appeals Court cited precedent from Adams v. State (2010), explaining that although a late oath is not always reversible error, it must occur before deliberations begin to preserve a fair trial. In this case, the oath was deemed so delayed that the jury became “fatally infirm,” compromising the verdict’s validity.

This case serves as a reminder of the importance of proper trial procedure and how even small judicial oversights can justify a new trial under Georgia law.

Georgia’s Supreme Court Denies Immunity to Doctor Who Overrode Advance Directive

September 22, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that a doctor and hospital could not claim immunity after allegedly ignoring a patient’s advance directive in a medical malpractice case.

The lawsuit stemmed from a Richmond County case in which a doctor intubated and placed a 91-year-old woman on life support against her health care agent’s wishes. The plaintiff, her granddaughter, argued this act caused unnecessary suffering and violated Georgia’s Advance Directive Act.

Both the trial court and Court of Appeals found that the doctor failed to act in good faith, as required by O.C.G.A. § 31-32-10, and the Supreme Court agreed, emphasizing that medical decisions should reflect the patient’s will—not the provider’s.

This case reinforces the importance of patient autonomy and the legal obligations of healthcare providers in Georgia when following advance directives.

Appeals Court Sees Through Convicted Burglar’s Attempt to Cloak Actions as Seeking Shelter

September 15, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld a Fulton County burglary conviction, dismissing the defendant’s claim that he entered the property seeking shelter.

According to court records, the man was caught removing door hinges after breaking a porch door, and valuables inside the home suggested intent to steal. The defendant also challenged the trial court’s refusal to include criminal trespass as a lesser offense, but the Appeals Court found no evidence to support that instruction.

The Court further dismissed arguments about jury instructions and ineffective counsel, ruling that the trial court’s process and the defense attorney’s actions were appropriate. This case illustrates how Georgia courts interpret burglary intent under O.C.G.A. § 16-7-1 and underscores the importance of experienced representation in criminal trials.

Georgia’s Child Hearsay Statute Prevents Trial Counsel from Objecting

September 13, 2016 No Comments

The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld multiple Gwinnett County child molestation convictions, finding that the defendant’s attorney acted reasonably under Georgia’s Child Hearsay Statute.

The defendant claimed ineffective counsel, arguing his attorney failed to object to several witnesses who testified about the victim’s statements. The Appeals Court, however, explained that the statute permits certain out-of-court statements made before a child turns 16, and that objections would have had no merit.

Additionally, the Court supported the attorney’s strategic decision not to object to a nurse examiner’s testimony, noting that doing so could have alienated the jury. The ruling affirms the importance of Georgia’s hearsay laws and illustrates how defense strategy and admissible evidence intersect in sensitive criminal cases.