Alvelo v. the State.
Decision Date | 10 January 2011 |
Docket Number | No. S10A1662.,S10A1662. |
Citation | 288 Ga. 437,704 S.E.2d 787 |
Parties | ALVELOv.The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Steven L. Sparger, Savannah, for appellant.Cecelia Harris, Assistant District Attorney, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Spencer Lawton, Jr., District Attorney, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Mary K. Ware, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.HUNSTEIN, Chief Justice.
Stephen Alvelo was convicted of malice murder and other crimes arising out of the death of Walter Cooper. He appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial.1 Because we agree with Alvelo that the trial court applied an erroneous legal standard in his motion for new trial, we vacate the order denying that motion and remand the case to the trial court.
1. The record reveals that Alvelo filed a timely motion for new trial in which he specifically asserted that the verdict was “against the weight of the evidence.” See OCGA § 5–5–21 ( ). As the trial court expressly noted in its order, Alvelo urged the court to sit as the “thirteenth juror.” The trial court, however, then explicitly declined to consider the “credibility of witnesses,” stating that
In Ricketts v. Williams, 242 Ga. 303, 304, 248 S.E.2d 673 (1978), this Court held that the “discretionary decision of a trial court that the verdict is against the ‘weight of the evidence’ ... is the same as Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.” We then stated that the trial court on motion for new trial
“may weigh the evidence and consider the credibility of witnesses. If the court reaches the conclusion that the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence and that a miscarriage of justice may have resulted, the verdict may be set aside and a new trial granted. [”] [Cits.]
[704 S.E.2d 789 , 288 Ga. 439]
(Emphasis supplied.) Ricketts, supra at 304, 248 S.E.2d 673.
It thus appears that the trial court, when it explicitly declined to consider the “credibility of witnesses,” failed to apply the proper standard in assessing the weight of the evidence as requested by Alvelo in his motion for new trial. Only the trial court is authorized by law to conduct such an assessment. See generally Drake v. State, 241 Ga. 583(1), 247 S.E.2d 57 (1978). We accordingly vacate the order...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Copeland v. State
...720 S.E.2d 244 (2011) (trial court considered witness credibility and decided issue against defendant). Compare Alvelo v. State, 288 Ga. 437, 438(1), 704 S.E.2d 787 (2011) (trial court “explicitly declined to consider the ‘credibility of witnesses' ”); Moore, supra, 315 Ga.App. at 391, 727 ......
- Faulkner v. State
-
Sellers v. State
...Cf. White, 293 Ga. at 524–525(2), 753 S.E.2d 115; Choisnet v. State, 292 Ga. 860, 862, 742 S.E.2d 476 (2013); Alvelo v. State, 288 Ga. 437, 439(1), 704 S.E.2d 787 (2011). 2. Sellers also argues that his conviction for kidnapping with bodily injury must be reversed because the evidence of as......
-
Dixon v. State
...its duty to exercise its discretion and weigh the evidence and consider the credibility of the witnesses. See Alvelo v. State , 288 Ga. 437, 438-439 (1), 704 S.E.2d 787 (2011). "Having performed this duty to sit as a ‘thirteenth juror’ and having weighed the evidence and considered the cred......