Lett v. The State

A26A0567 · Court of Appeals of Georgia · June 23, 2026 · No. A26A0567

Summary

The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed Ashley Lett’s convictions, sentence, and denial of her motion for new trial. The court held that the trial court did not plainly err in instructing the jury on voluntary intoxication and the mental-capacity insanity defense, concluding that the instructions as a whole reflected the Georgia Supreme Court’s intervening decision in State v. Wierson.

Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Writing for the Court
Davis, Judge; Doyle, P. J.; Davis, J.; Senior Judge C. Andrew Fuller
Jurisdiction
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decision date
June 23, 2026
Docket number
A26A0567
Procedural posture
Direct appeal from the denial of a motion for new trial following a jury's criminal convictions. The appellant challenged the jury instructions on insanity and voluntary intoxication.
Standard of review
Because Lett did not object to the jury instructions at trial, the Court of Appeals reviewed the claims for plain error. The court examined the jury charge as a whole. In evaluating whether an error was plain after an intervening change in law, the court applied the law in effect at the time of appellate review.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Ashley Lett v. The State
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

jury instructionsstandard jury instructionsinstructions objectionscriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate practice

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court plainly erred by instructing the jury on voluntary intoxication and the mental-capacity insanity defense in a manner inconsistent with State v. Wierson.
  2. Whether the instructions, considered as a whole, adequately instructed the jury that a defendant legally insane when sober remains entitled to an insanity defense even if voluntarily intoxicated.
  3. Whether the intervening change in Georgia law applied in Lett's direct appeal.

Holdings

  1. The trial court did not plainly err. Although Wierson applied to Lett's direct appeal, the voluntary-intoxication and mental-capacity instructions, considered as a whole, accurately conveyed that Lett could not be held criminally responsible if she lacked the mental capacity to distinguish right from wrong, regardless of voluntary intoxication.
  2. Lett failed to establish plain error because she did not show a clear or obvious error in the jury instructions.

Key quotations

Thus, as a whole, the jury was instructed that Lett could not be held responsible for the crimes if even when sober, she could not distinguish between right and wrong, irrespective of her voluntary intoxication. (13)

Factual background

Lett lived with her parents and twin daughters and had diagnoses of bipolar and schizoaffective disorders, with several prior institutionalizations. During what her family described as a manic episode, Lett had been drinking, chased her daughter, choked her until she temporarily lost consciousness, and injured her father when he attempted to intervene. When law-enforcement officers arrived, Lett screamed, punched windows, and punched and kicked officers.

Procedural history

A Cherokee County jury found Lett guilty of battery, family violence, and guilty but mentally ill of aggravated assault, family violence, obstruction of an officer, and terroristic threats, while acquitting her of other charges. The trial court imposed a 20-year sentence, with five years in confinement and the balance on probation, and denied Lett's motion for new trial. Lett appealed, arguing that intervening Georgia Supreme Court precedent required a new trial based on instructional error.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…