A Gwinnett County judge on Thursday put off a decision on whether to reopen the case of former Doraville police officer Miles Bryant, whose 2024 conviction in the kidnapping and killing of 16-year-old Susana Morales sent shockwaves through the community. During a morning hearing in Gwinnett Superior Court, the judge heard testimony from Bryant’s former trial lawyer about the choices she made in the courtroom and said he would not rule until the state files a written response.
Former trial lawyer takes the stand
At the motions hearing, the defense called Bryant’s trial attorney, Tracy Drake, who walked through moments in the original trial where she chose not to object, missed testimony she now believes should have been challenged, and fought over Life360 location data and the way a jailhouse informant was handled, according to FOX 5 Atlanta. Prosecutors pressed Drake on cross-examination about how thoroughly she reviewed discovery and how familiar she was with witness lists, then asked for permission to submit a written brief after the hearing. After arguments wrapped, the judge said he would reserve ruling on the amended motion.
Claims at the heart of the new-trial bid
The defense’s second amended motion, filed Nov. 26, 2025, argues that Bryant did not receive effective legal representation and that a series of trial errors, including what the filing labels speculative testimony from the medical examiner, deprived him of a fair trial, as reported by AOL. The motion leans on the Strickland v. Washington standard and raises Daubert challenges to portions of the expert testimony, asserting that these issues could have influenced the jury’s decision. The defense also keeps earlier claims alive and asks the court to look at the entire record to decide whether a new trial is warranted.
Evidence that persuaded jurors the first time
Jurors found Bryant guilty in June 2024 on charges including malice murder, felony murder and kidnapping after prosecutors presented a stack of evidence they said linked him to Morales, including Life360 data, cell-phone records and the discovery of Bryant’s service weapon near the teenager’s remains, according to CourtTV. Prosecutors also highlighted his internet searches and other records that jurors later pointed to when returning guilty verdicts and a life sentence. Those same trial details are now central to the defense’s claims about ineffective assistance and problematic evidence that are in front of the court.
What happens next
The judge told both sides he will wait for the state’s written response before issuing a decision. Prosecutors requested, and received, 30 days from the date the hearing transcript is filed to submit their brief, according to FOX 5 Atlanta. If the court decides that trial counsel’s performance was both deficient and harmful to the outcome, it could grant Bryant a new trial. If not, the conviction will remain in place and the defense will have to shift its focus to higher courts. Either way, more paperwork and likely more appeals are on deck, which could drag out the final resolution of the case for months.
Legal context
Under the Strickland test for ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show that a lawyer’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that this shortfall affected the verdict, as outlined in Supreme Court precedent described on Oyez. Daubert challenges, rooted in the Court’s decision detailed by the Supreme Court, require judges to act as gatekeepers and assess whether expert testimony is reliable before jurors ever hear it. Courts often defer to strategic decisions made by trial lawyers, so a successful new-trial motion has to clear a high bar by proving both poor performance and a reasonable chance that the verdict would have been different. How Gwinnett Superior Court applies those standards to the current record will determine whether Bryant gets another run at trial or his conviction stays put.
