DALTON, Ga. — The Supreme Court of Georgia has overturned the theft conviction of Skyy Mims, a Detroit native who was also convicted of malice murder for the stabbing death of convenience store clerk Dahyabhai Kalidas “D.K.” Chaudhari on March 9, 2014, in Dalton.

But the ruling by the court is expected to have little effect on Mims, who is serving a life sentence without parole plus five years for the killing at the Kanku Hi-Tech convenience store off of Airport Road. And District Attorney Bert Poston said at this point there is no need for a re-trial on the theft by bringing a stolen vehicle into the state charge.

The court ruled unanimously — with Justice Charlie Bethel, a Dalton native, not participating — to overturn the theft conviction, but affirmed the other convictions. Mims had argued “that the evidence was insufficient to sustain her theft conviction, her trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance, and her due process rights were violated when the trial court denied her request to be present at the motion for new trial hearing on remand in order to support her ineffectiveness claims,” according to the court’s decision. Bethel was sworn in to the court in October.

Mims was found guilty on 11 charges, including five for the murder, on May 1, 2015. Other charges included armed robbery, second-degree burglary, possession of a firearm/knife during the commission of a crime and theft by bringing stolen property into the state. It was the final charge, involving the theft of a 2012 Kia Soul in Detroit on Jan. 30, 2014, that the court reversed.

“The ruling left intact everything except for the theft charge,” said Micah Gates of the Public Defender’s Office, who is representing Mims. “They said because of the ineffective previous counsel they would grant a new trial on that charge if the prosecution wished to pursue it.”

Mims was represented at the murder trial by Carla Marable, a Detroit-based attorney.

“I think the Supreme Court gave a good ruling,” Marable said. “I probably should have severed it (the theft charge) from the murder case, but since I was dealing with the bigger charges of murder, that was the least of her concerns.”

In the ruling written by Justice Nels S.D. Peterson, the court found that “trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move to sever (the theft count) from the murder-related offenses. All of the remaining ineffectiveness claims against trial counsel fail, and because these claims fail for reasons independent of her absence at the hearing, her due process rights were not violated.”

Mims argued that “the theft offense was not of a similar character to the murder-related counts, was not based on the same conduct, and did not involve the same victims or witnesses,” according to the opinion.

“There is no argument, much less a showing, that the theft offense and the murder-related offenses were parts of a single scheme or plan or that the offenses were of a similar character,” Peterson wrote. “The crimes were committed about a month apart and involved different victims in different states. … the fact that the car was stolen or that Mims brought the stolen vehicle to Georgia from another state had no bearing on any of the murder-related offenses.”

Citing case law, Peterson wrote that “Trial counsel was therefore deficient for failing to move to sever the theft count.”

“Having decided that trial counsel was deficient, we must assess whether this deficiency prejudiced Mims,” Peterson wrote. “As to the murder-related offenses, Mims has not demonstrated that she was prejudiced by counsel’s failure because of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. That evidence included a video recording of the incident, her possession of the Kia Soul that was used during the commission of those offenses, her possession of lottery tickets taken from gas station, and her possession of a knife and gloves that contained the victim’s blood and Mims’s DNA. It is highly unlikely that the evidence that the Kia Soul was stolen affected the outcome of the murder-related charges.”

Poston said in an emailed statement that the theft charge will be dropped.

“I read the opinion this morning,” Poston wrote. “I don’t agree with it. I’m talking to the Attorney General’s Office about whether it would be worthwhile to file a motion for reconsideration. Assuming the ruling stands, I will file a motion to dismiss the theft count. Mims is still serving a life without parole sentence for murder so there would be no practical purpose served by retrying her on the theft of the vehicle.”

Gates agreed that there would be little use in moving forward on a re-trial.

“At this point, the first thing that happens is (Poston) and I will decide if there needs to be any motion for reconsideration,” Gates said. “The next step, theoretically, is a new trial on the theft charge. It would be highly unlikely to have another trial.”

Mims had also sought a new trial on the murder convictions, arguing that Marable should have sought a change of venue because of pre-trial publicity, pursued a plea deal with the district attorney’s office and argued a defense based on insanity or mental illness.

“… Mims must show both that her counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient and that she was prejudiced by this deficient performance … Decisions made as a matter of trial strategy and tactics do not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel unless ‘they were so patently unreasonable that no competent attorney would have followed such a course,’” Peterson wrote, citing case law.

The court rejected Mims’ arguments.