Corvi v. GeorgiaAnnotate this Case
Appellant Marta Corvi appealed her convictions for second-degree cruelty to children and for reckless conduct related to the drowning deaths of
Sophia Juarez and Mia Penoyer. On appeal, appellant argued the trial court erred in failing to quash the indictment as being void for vagueness as applied and challenged the sufficiency of the evidence. The Supreme Court concluded that due to the factual circumstances of this case, even when viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence did not show appellant’s conduct constituted criminal negligence that would sustain charges of cruelty to children in the second degree and reckless conduct. The evidence was therefore insufficient to convict and the trial court erred when it failed to grant appellant’s motion for a directed verdict and when it rejected the claim in its order denying appellant’s motion for new trial. Because the Court found the evidence was insufficient to convict appellant for the crimes for which she was charged, it did not reach the void for vagueness issue.