In the first appearance of this case before this Court, we affirmed, in part, appellant’s convictions for murder and aggravated assault that were entered after a jury trial. See Walker-Madden v. State,
Appellant appeals the entry of the new sentence and raises as his sole enumeration of error the assertion that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the convictions on these counts. Appellant’s counsel urges this Court to clarify whether it is necessary to appeal, on the
The law is clear that “any ruling by the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals in a case shall be binding in all subsequent proceedings in that case in the lower court and in the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals as the case may be.” OCGA § 9-11-60 (h). In this Court’s previous opinion in this case, we concluded the evidence “was legally sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Walker-Madden was guilty of the crimes of which the jury, in fact, found him guilty” Walker-Madden, supra,
Appeal dismissed.
