Strozier v. State

829 S.E.2d 361 (Ga. 2019) · Supreme Court of Georgia · June 10, 2019 · No. S19A0790

Summary

The Georgia Supreme Court held that the trial court lacked authority to amend the defendants’ sentences after the Court had affirmed only their felony-murder convictions on a prior appeal. Applying Georgia’s statutory law-of-the-case rule, the Court determined that the amended sentencing orders were nullities and vacated them, leaving the original sentences in effect.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the Court
Ellington, Justice
Jurisdiction
Georgia
Decision date
June 10, 2019
Docket number
S19A0790
Procedural posture
After the Supreme Court affirmed Strozier's felony-murder conviction and sentence on Count 4 in a prior appeal, the trial court entered amended sentencing orders imposing sentences on convictions that had been vacated or merged. Strozier appealed those amended sentencing orders.
Standard of review
Whether the trial court's amended sentencing orders violated the statutory law-of-the-case rule and exceeded the scope of the Supreme Court's prior decision.
Precedential value
Published opinion; precedential
Parties
Jekari Strozier v. State
Disposition
vacated

Topics

sentencingcriminal procedureappellate procedurefinal judgment rule

Practice areas

criminal proceduresentencingappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court could enter amended sentencing orders imposing sentences on convictions that the Supreme Court had vacated or held merged in the prior appeal.
  2. Whether the amended sentencing orders violated Georgia's statutory law-of-the-case rule.

Holdings

  1. The trial court lacked authority to revise the Supreme Court's prior holding affirming the appellants' sentences as to Count 4 and to impose sentences on counts that had been vacated or merged.
  2. The amended sentencing orders were nullities and did not supersede the sentencing orders previously reviewed by the Supreme Court; the Count 4 sentences remained in effect.

Key quotations

Because the trial court was precluded from revising that holding, the amended sentencing orders are nullities that did not supersede the sentencing orders already reviewed by this Court. (362)
When the cases returned to the trial court, all the court was required to do was to file the remittiturs. (362)

Factual background

A jury found Jekari Strozier guilty of felony murder and numerous related offenses. The Supreme Court previously affirmed the felony-murder conviction predicated on Count 4, while other counts were merged, vacated by operation of law, or reversed. On return of the remittitur, the trial court nevertheless imposed a life sentence on Count 3, which had been vacated, and a fifteen-year sentence on Count 13, which had merged into another offense.

Procedural history

A jury convicted Strozier and Anthony of felony murder and multiple related offenses. In the prior appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed only the Count 4 felony-murder convictions, held that other convictions were merged, vacated by operation of law, or reversed, and did not remand for resentencing. Despite the limited remittitur, the trial court entered amended sentences on Count 3 and Count 13. The State conceded, and Strozier argued, that the amended orders violated Georgia's law-of-the-case rule.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…