Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has ordered an urgent review of Trump’s co-defendant Harrison Floyd’s appeal in the Georgia RICO case, arguing that District Attorney Fani Willis overstepped her authority by seeking an election-related indictment.
Harrison Floyd, a prominent figure for Black Voices for Trump, faces three charges: Count 1, RICO, and Counts 30 and 31, including, “conspiracy to commit solicitation of false statements and writings” and “influencing a witness.”
Last week, Floyd’s legal team filed a motion seeking the judge’s approval to appeal his prior decision on a Plea in Bar filed last year.
After several months of deliberation, Scott McAfee ultimately issued a Certificate of Immediate Review.
Law & Crime reported:
A co-defendant in the Georgia racketeering (RICO) and election subversion case against former President Donald Trump will be allowed to immediately appeal a series of trial court rulings against him to the Georgia Court of Appeals.
Fulton Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee on Monday granted a certificate of immediate review allowing Harrison Floyd, the former leader of Black Voices for Trump, to request a hearing from the higher court about his procedural motion to dismiss the case.
McAfee has, on several prior occasions, denied arguments advanced by Floyd that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis was operating beyond her jurisdiction when her office began an “election-related” investigation and, subsequently, when the charges were filed.
Floyd has been pressing the issue since October 2023, arguing Willis’ office “did not have authority to investigation or presentment authority to bring election-related charges against the Defendant absent a referral from the State Election Board.”
The state replied to those arguments last November and Floyd’s attorneys replied to the state last December, court documents show.
The Georgia Court of Appeals is now tasked with examining whether Judge McAfee correctly applied the law, particularly in instances where defense attorneys argue there were conflicts. This includes granting a district attorney the authority to pursue election-related charges without adhering to the customary procedures involving a grand jury.
“It is undisputed that no referral was sought nor granted,” Floyd’s latest motion reads. “Despite this Court’s explanation of ‘harmony’ amongst these statutes, to hold that the District Attorney holds concurrent jurisdiction with the SEB, and that a referral from the SEB to the District Attorney is not necessary in election-related cases, renders O.C.G.A. § 21-2-35 absolutely meaningless and superfluous.”
Floyd’s attorneys now have 10 days to file their motion with the appeals court.
The appeals court will then have 45 days to review the motion before making a decision whether or not to grant an appeal.
