Georgia Supreme Court to stop hearing most murder cases by 2028

Legislative panel to confront Georgia’s ‘broken’ post-conviction system

Under Georgia law, the state’s high court has jurisdiction over all capital cases — that is, cases where the death penalty has been imposed. But the question of which court has jurisdiction over cases where the death penalty has not been sought has been a matter of judicial interpretation rather than law dating back to 1983, when the state’s current constitution was adopted.

Though numerous opinions since then have questioned the high court’s role in deciding these cases — including one from last year — the justices have continued to hear and issue rulings in murder cases not involving the death penalty. But in his concurring opinion, ​​Peterson called for an end to the longstanding practice, which he said takes up too much of the court’s workload and results in too many binding precedents.

“Focusing our limited judicial resources on resolving murder appeals ultimately detracts from the time to devote to the core tasks assigned to this Court by the Constitution and the General Assembly,” he wrote. 

The notice, he said, gives the Court of Appeals a “long lead time” to adjust to the change. But lawmakers, who allocate funding to the state’s court system, will have only one legislative session to allocate funding for the transfer, which lawmakers and legal experts say could involve adding a new panel of judges — or possibly more — to accommodate the influx of murder cases.

During a July meeting of the House Judiciary Committee, Court of Appeals Chief Judge Trenton Brown warned lawmakers that a change in jurisdiction of that magnitude would require millions of dollars in extra resources to accommodate the increased workload.

“Moving that volume of work would create an unfunded mandate on this court, already working at or above its present capacity,” Brown said.

Rep. Scott Holcomb, a lawyer and Atlanta Democrat who sits on the committee, said it’s too early to know exactly how much the change will cost. But he said lawmakers will need to begin reallocating funding next year when they reconvene for the 2027 legislative session, and that the full process could take several years.

“My prediction is likely it will take three to five years for us to have a really good understanding of precisely what the resource allocations need to be,” he said.

But Holcomb said he approves of the change, which will allow the Supreme Court to focus on their main responsibilities, such as constitutional and emergency cases. As Peterson pointed out in his opinion, Georgia’s status as a battleground state means emergency election cases will likely become more frequent.

“While there will be some short-term disruption with the shift, in the long term, I think our state will be better for it,” he said.

Lauren Shubow, an Atlanta-based criminal defense attorney who represents Georgians facing murder convictions, said she worries about the shift and what it would mean for her clients.

“It is well known that the workload of the Georgia Court of Appeals is outrageously high in comparison to other state appellate courts,” she said. “We don’t have enough judges as it is, and then to assign them these additional murders, which are some of the most complicated cases that exist, that would just be an additional burden on them.”

A decades-old law promised Georgians a second chance. A new law hopes to deliver on that promise.

For cases that go before the Supreme Court, all nine justices will hear and weigh in on a case, but cases in the Court of Appeals are decided by a panel of three judges. Leigh Ann Webster, a criminal appeals attorney and adjunct professor at the Emory University School of Law, said the change could leave Georgians who are appealing their murder convictions with less attention and fewer options for their cases to be thoroughly reviewed.

“It’s sort of inherent that you’re getting more consideration and review when you have nine people looking at it as opposed to three,” she said.

Additionally, Webster said, opinions issued by the Georgia Court of Appeals aren’t always as accessible as those from the Georgia Supreme Court.

But Holcomb said while the change may be uncomfortable in the short term, the Supreme Court will still be able to weigh in on murder cases that require additional review.

“The benefit of the structure that’s been proposed by Chief Justice Peterson is that the Supreme Court can still take up any cases where the Court of Appeals makes a mistake, or where there needs to be guidance from the top court,” he said.

“I understand people having concerns, and since we’re talking about justice and liberty issues, those concerns are of course appreciated and valued,” he added. “But I do agree with the shift and think it’s in the best interest of the state to move in this direction.”