GA: State post-conviction petitioner arguing no “full and fair opportunity” to litigate 4A claim fails

Post-conviction petitioner trying to get around Stone on federal habeas fails. Gines v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 87 (Mar. 12, 2026)*:

Mahone complains that the trial court denied him a “full and fair opportunity” to litigate his motion to suppress cell phone records and asserts that this deprived him of “his Fourth Amendment rights and due process.” But Mahone’s skeletal argument fails to set forth even an inkling as to the factual basis for this claim. He instead provides only bare citations to the record, and those cited portions of the record reflect that the trial court in fact held a hearing on his motion to suppress, later heard argument on that same motion on multiple occasions, and entertained two motions for reconsideration filed as to that motion. Mahone himself even acknowledges in his appellate brief that the court heard evidence on the motion to suppress. As Mahone provides no substantive argument as to how the hearings that were actually held were legally deficient and makes no effort to explain what more the trial court should have done to ensure that he had a “full and fair opportunity” to litigate his motion, Mahone has failed to meet his burden of showing error affirmatively by the record, and this claim fails.