Harold William George v. State ( 2022 )

FORTH DIVISION
RICKMAN, C. J.,
DILLARD, P. J., and BROWN, J.
NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be
physically received in our clerk’s office within ten
days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.
https://www.gaappeals.us/rules
July 26, 2022
In the Court of Appeals of Georgia
A20A0993. GEORGE v. THE STATE.
RICKMAN, Chief Judge.
This is the second appearance of this case before us. In an unpublished opinion,
we affirmed Harold George’s 2018 convictions for child molestation, enticing a child
for indecent purposes, and sexual battery. George v. State, 357 Ga. App. XXIV (Case
No. A20A0993) (Oct. 23, 2020) (unpublished). In Division 1 (b) of our opinion, we
rejected George’s claim that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to
suppress evidence seized during a search when that evidence was not specifically
listed in the search warrant. Id. at *8 (1) (b).
On certiorari, the Supreme Court of Georgia overruled the line of authority on
which we had relied, including Walsh v. State, 236 Ga. App. 558, 560 (1) (b) (512
SE2d 408) (1999), and McBee v. State, 228 Ga. App. 16, 21 (3) (491 SE2d 97)
(1997), and concluded that we had “erred in considering the relevance of evidence
alone as justifying its seizure outside the scope of a search warrant, without
considering whether the requirements of the plain view doctrine have been met.”
George v. State, 312 Ga. 801, 807 (865 SE2d 127) (2021). The Supreme Court then
vacated our opinion and remanded to this Court “with instructions for it to vacate the
trial court’s order on George’s motion for new trial and remand the case to the trial
court with direction to reconsider the motion consistent with the law set forth in this
opinion.” Id. Based on our review of George v. State, 312 Ga. 801, we conclude that
the rulings in that decision implicate only Division 1 (b) of our opinion in George v.
State, 357 Ga. App. XXIV. Accordingly, we vacate Division 1 (b) of our prior
opinion in George v. State, 357 Ga. App. XXIV, and adopt the opinion of the
Supreme Court in George v. State, 312 Ga. 801, with respect to that division.
Divisions 1 (a), 2, 3, and 4 of our opinion were not affected by the Supreme Court’s
decision and thus remain in effect. See Shadix v. Carroll County, 274 Ga. 560, 563-
564 (1) (554 SE2d 465) (2001). We also vacate the trial court’s order denying
George’s motion for new trial and remand with direction that the trial court reconsider
that motion consistent with the law stated in the Supreme Court’s opinion.
Judgment affirmed in part and vacated in part, and case remanded with
direction. Dillard, P. J., and Brown, J., concur.
2