Murray v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia vacated an order denying Andrew Murray’s amended motion for new trial and remanded for consideration of the motion’s merits. The court held that the trial court could not deny or dismiss the motion solely because Murray presented no additional evidence at the hearing or failed to appear, although those circumstances could waive the right to a hearing. The court also disapproved prior authority to the extent it permitted dismissal of a motion for new trial on that basis.

Holdings

1. A trial court may not deny the merits of all claims in an amended motion for new trial merely because the defendant presented no additional evidence at the hearing when some claims can be resolved from the existing trial record.
2. A defendant's failure to request or attend a motion-for-new-trial hearing may waive the right to a hearing and the opportunity to expand the record, but it does not waive the right to have the motion decided on its merits based on the existing record.
3. Scott v. State is disapproved insofar as it held that dismissal of a motion for new trial is proper when defense counsel fails to appear for the hearing. Mimms v. State is disapproved to the extent it indicates that dismissal based on failure to appear may be proper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a trial court may deny or dismiss a motion for new trial on the ground that the defendant failed to present additional evidence at the hearing when some claims can be decided from the existing trial record.
2. Whether a defendant's failure to appear at or participate in a scheduled motion-for-new-trial hearing permits the trial court to dismiss the motion without considering its merits.
3. Whether Scott v. State and Mimms v. State correctly permitted dismissal of a motion for new trial based on failure to appear at the hearing.

Disposition

vacated