The Georgia Supreme Court heard its first oral arguments in its courtroom in the new Nathan Deal Judicial Center. (Photo: John Disney/ALM)

For its first oral arguments in the new Nathan Deal Judicial Center Tuesday, the Georgia Supreme Court heard appeals in a half-dozen murder cases, plus a challenge to state law regulating lactation consultants.

But the first order of business at the 10 a.m. opening was swearing in about 40 new lawyers in a packed courtroom. With the new lawyers still gathered around the nine-member bench, Chief Justice Harold Melton took a moment to reflect on the historic day.

"This is the first building in the state of Georgia's history dedicated to the appellate courts," Chief Justice Harold Melton said. "It shows just how serious our state is in what the judicial branch represents."

Melton said the oath the new lawyers had just taken is similar to the one judges take—"to uphold and support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Georgia." He said the real meaning is to work in support of justice for all—"rich and poor." He called it a "very intimidating, very humbling charge."

Chief Justice Harold Melton (left) gives words of wisdom to newly sworn in attorneys to the Supreme Court of Georgia as Justice Robert Benham listens. (Photo: John Disney/ALM)

But he added his reasons for hope. "I have confidence because I have the privilege of serving with my sister and brothers on this court," Melton said, naming each one. His voice quivered, and he choked up a bit upon naming the most senior member, Justice Robert Benham, who has said he will retire in March.

"We stand together, and that makes all the difference in the world," Melton said, adding that such was not always the case in the state's history.

"We are so dependent on you," he told the new lawyers. "We count on you to steer us right."

"We're going to give you a hard time when you come up here," Melton said. "But we hope you will see in that it's because we are begging you to steer us right in the law."

Melton added, "We ask that you be diligent. We ask that you be brief."

Melton also sounded a holistic theme. "More importantly, we ask you to take care of yourselves," he said. "You're greatest skill as a lawyer is who you are as a person." Melton added, "We want you to be strong, healthy lawyers" but also strong, healthy brothers, sisters, spouses and parents."

After the crowd of new lawyers and well-wishers emptied from the courtroom, the justices moved on to their first case in their new $131 million home. It was the combined appeal of Albert and Ashley Debolbot, a military couple convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison for the 2008 death of their newborn daughter McKenzy in Columbus.

Their lawyers split the appellees' alloted 20 minutes. They argued that the couple was denied a fair trial, including the ability to present their medical expert witnesses who would have testified that McKenzy had a medical condition at birth that caused the head injuries that led to her death. They said the parents were convicted of a murder that never happened.

Arguing for the mother was Carrie Sperling of the Wisconsin Innocence Project and a professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School in Madison.

Her first target was the prosecutor's directive to jurors in closing argument that they did not have to be certain of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt—or even beyond 51%—in order to convict the parents.

Sperling called it an "unthinkable characterization of the state's burden of proof." She added a question: "How can anyone have faith in the criminal justice system if we can send someone to prison for life without the possibility of parole without being 51% sure of their guilt?"

Arguing for the father was A. James Anderson of Robbins Kaplan in Atlanta. Anderson followed with more detail about the trial judge and the prosecutor preventing the jury from knowing about abnormalities, including a 10 times greater than normal expansion in head circumference before the baby left the hospital.

Senior assistant attorney general Paula Smith argued for the state, calling the couple's claim about a medical cause of death "a novel theory." The justices pelted her with questions about the fairness of the trial.

When they finished, Melton thanked the attorneys and said, "This is a very difficult case."

The cases are: Albert Debolbot v. the State, No. S19A1474, and Ashley Debelbot v. the State, No. S19A1475.