John Cornyn Will Be a Texas Thom Tillis and That’s Awful
Scott Jennings Shredded This Former Dem Rep's Iran Cheerleading on CNN Last Night
Here Are the Two People DNI Gabbard Issued Criminal Referrals for Concerning...
Idiot Math
AI Nude Deepfakes Becoming a Dire Issue in Schools
Pocahontas Wants to Spend Jeff Bezos’s Money
The Pope, Three Cardinals, and the Iran War
In Israel, Garbage Trucks Bring the Garbage
The Implosion of Eric Swalwell: What Was He Thinking?
Debunking Five Tax Day Myths
My Advice to (Young) Women
Immigration in America: Legal Pathways, Border Reality, and the Fight Over Who Belongs
Trump’s Hormuz Masterstroke: How American Energy Dominance Is Exposing China’s Fatal Weakn...
New York Can’t Claim 'Choice' While Silencing It
U.S. Secret Service Seized 13 Card Skimmers in Dallas, Saving $13.5M in Fraud
Tipsheet

Did You Miss This Brutal Exchange Before the Georgia Supreme Court?

Did You Miss This Brutal Exchange Before the Georgia Supreme Court?
monkeybusinessimages/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Most of this story is what the late Justice Antonin Scalia called a lawyer’s work. That’s why he opposed cameras during oral arguments before the Supreme Court—there’s nothing to hide. For the most part, these decisions are not controversial, even the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed, and most of what is discussed is beyond boring. Again, it’s the lawyer’s work. 

Advertisement

At the state level, there is some video access, but the situation hasn’t changed. Most of this information won’t hold voters' attention unless there’s a clear mistake that everyone can understand. Everyone knows to be prepared and not cite things that don’t exist, right? Well, at CNN, the standards are different. In Georgia, one of its attorneys, trying to end an appeal petition for a previously convicted murderer, was called out by a Georgia Supreme Court judge for citing statutes that do not exist, and it was all caught on video (via Fox 5 Atlanta) [emphasis mine]:

The Supreme Court of Georgia heard arguments Wednesday in the appeal of Hannah Payne, the woman convicted in the 2019 shooting death of Kenneth Herring after prosecutors said she chased him down following a traffic crash in Clayton County. 

Payne was found guilty in 2023 of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault and other charges in Herring’s death. She was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole, plus additional consecutive years. Prosecutors said Payne followed the 62-year-old after he left the scene of a crash, cut off his truck and then shot him after a confrontation.  

At trial, the state argued Payne was "playing cop" by going after a driver she was not directly involved with. Payne testified she believed Herring was impaired, stayed on the phone with 911 and was trying to help when the encounter turned violent. She claimed Herring grabbed her and that the gun went off during a struggle. 

On appeal, Payne argues her trial lawyer was ineffective for failing to request jury instructions on citizen’s arrest and defense of others. 

[…] 

Arguing for the state, Deborah Leslie urged the court to uphold Payne’s conviction and the denial of her motion for a new trial. Leslie said the evidence did not support either omitted jury instruction and told the justices, "The evidence showed that Ms. Payne was the aggressor. She used unreasonable force and fatally shot an unarmed, non-threatening motorist, Mr. Herring, after ignoring 911 directives." Leslie argued there was no lawful detention to support a citizen’s arrest instruction and no evidence of "an imminent threat of unlawful force against a third party" to support defense of others. 

The court also appeared focused on whether Payne’s lawyer made a reasonable strategic choice at trial by pursuing self-defense and accident rather than risking what the state said would amount to conceding false imprisonment. At times, the justices sounded skeptical about that argument and questioned how the court could find no prejudice if it concluded the missing instructions should have been requested. 

The hearing ended with an unexpected dispute over the trial court’s order denying Payne’s motion for new trial. One justice said the order contained "at least five citations to cases that don't exist" along with other citations and quotations that did not appear to support the points for which they were used. Leslie said, "No, Your Honor, I do not believe so, they were not," when asked whether those citations appeared in the version she submitted, adding, "I did prepare an order, that order was revised." The court said it would issue a briefing order directing the state on what needed to be supplemented. 

Advertisement

Comment below, but yikes. She submitted fake documents. There are allegations that AI was used. Also, there was no revised order, at least that's what Leslie’s boss, Clayton County District Attorney Tasha Mosley, said. The DA’s office has until April 2 to explain how fake files were submitted to the state’s high court. 

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement