Court of Appeals Published Opinions - December 2007
Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.
The summary following each opinion is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what a particular opinion decides. The summary is not necessarily a full description of the issues discussed in an opinion.
12-4-2007 - Opinions
In this criminal matter, the appellant appeals his conviction for involuntary manslaughter asserting the trial judge erred in failing to require spectators in the courtroom to remove photograph buttons of the deceased from their clothing.
Jerry Gerald Serrette appeals from his convictions for trafficking cocaine and possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Serrette contends this court should remand for a reconstruction hearing because the record of his original trial was lost during the nearly eleven-year gap between conviction and sentencing due to his fugitive status. We dismiss.
12-18-2007 - Opinions
In this PCR proceeding, Dalton argued his guilty plea was involuntary due to trial counsel's failure to interview witnesses before advising him to plead guilty. The PCR court granted Dalton's application for relief. The Court of Appeals reversed the PCR court and held that the record is devoid of any probative evidence to support Dalton's post conviction relief.
12-19-2007 - Opinions
In this defamation action, the Appellant posits two issues: 1) Does the phrase “conned her out of” property and insurance money constitute slander per se as a matter of law; and (2) Did the circuit court err in allowing the Respondent to present a defense based on truth when truth was not pled as an affirmative defense?
12-20-2007 - Opinions
In this workers’ compensation case, the Appellants raise two issues: (1) Was the Appellate Panel’s conclusion supported by substantial evidence? (2) Did the Claimant’s injury satisfy the requirements of § 42-1-160 and applicable case law?
In this civil case, the Appellant posits two issues: (1) Did the trial court err in awarding prejudgment interest on the judgment when Dixie Bell failed to request prejudgment interest on the cause of action that was submitted to the jury? (2) Did Dixie Belle establish that the parties had agreed to a sum certain so as to entitle it to prejudgment interest when the testimony was ambiguous as to the method for calculating alleged damages and the jury rejected the plaintiff’s theory that a contract for a specific amount existed?
In this civil case, the Appellant presents the following issues: (1) Did the trial court err in effectively granting a new trial nisi additur based on the Thirteenth Juror Doctrine? (2) Did the trial court err in directing a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff on the issue of liability when the evidence did not support a directed verdict against one individual defendant or both defendants jointly? (3) Did the trial court err in granting a new trial against defendant Calvin Roberson only, for damages only, based upon the Thirteenth Juror Doctrine?
James Odom appeals the circuit court’s determination that police had probable cause to seize him in a traffic stop. He further argues that because the stop was illegal, the marijuana seized during the stop should have been suppressed. We affirm.