MOULTRIE — After spending more than 20 years in prison in connection with a 1993 rape/robbery case in Moultrie, Sedrick Moore’s charges were dismissed in August of 2023. Now, he is suing Colquitt County, Moultrie, the GBI, and others for damages.

Moore, 48, along with Tyrone White and Kerry Robinson, was charged with the rape of a Southwest Moultrie woman. He was also charged with armed robbery, four counts of possession of a firearm during commission of a crime, aggravated sodomy and burglary. He was found not guilty on one of the counts of possession of a firearm during commission of a crime and the aggravated sodomy charge. Moore was sentenced to 50 years in prison in February 2002.

After a hearing in April of 2023, Superior Court Judge Brian McDaniel overturned Moore’s conviction and granted him a new trial, based on new case findings.

According to a Superior Court document, a motion to enter a Nolle Prosequi was filed by Southern Judicial Circuit District Attorney Robert Rogers on Aug. 25, 2023, on behalf of the Colquitt County District Attorney’s office. This motion states that the State declined to prosecute the case further. According to the document, “The ends of justice have been served.”

On Aug. 28, 2023, McDaniel signed the motion of Nolle Prosequi, which dismissed all charges, and Moore, who had been released on bond on Aug. 24, was a free man.

This year, according to court documents, on May 9, Moore initially filed a complaint in the State Court of Douglas County. It was, then, moved to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

The defendants listed in the complaint, along with the City, County and GBI, include Jason Bradley Pearson, James Michael Harshbarger, the estate of James Michael Harshbarger, Joseph Smith, the estate of Joseph Smith, Tommy Raybon, the Moultrie Police Department, and all of the administrators of the aforementioned estates.

Also included were “John Does 1 and 2” and “John Doe Entities 1 and 2,” which were explained in court documents as, “unknown individuals and/or groups of individuals or companies that may have played a role in the acts causing or contributing to plaintiff’s wrongful conviction and subsequent damages.”

It also explains that Moore was unaware of the names and capacities of the “John Doe” defendants and will seek to ascertain them so that the complaint can be amended, again, with the true names and capacities.

According to Moore’s complaint, one of the things he alleged was that the DNA evidence used in his trial was inconclusive but the GBI analyst still testified that the DNA evidence was a match with Moore. It alleged that the law enforcement officers immediately focused on Moore as a suspect despite the lack of reliable evidence.

The nine counts filed against the defendants are as follows:

Against Law Enforcement Defendants, GBI, and Jason Bradley Pearson

— 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Fourteenth Amendment deprivation of liberty without due process of law and denial of a fair trial by misrepresenting evidence and presenting unreliable witness identification testimony.

Against Law Enforcement Defendants, Colquitt County and the City of Moultrie

— 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Malicious Prosecution

Against the City of Moultrie and Law Enforcement Defendants

— State Law Malicious Prosecution

Against all Defendants

— State Law Violation of Legal Duty, O.C.G.A. § 51-1-6, et seq

— Intentional and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

— Negligence

— Punitive and Exemplary Damages

— Attorney Fees and Costs

Against the City of Moultrie, Colquitt County and GBI

— Unconstitutional Policy, Custom, or Pattern and Practice of Promoting, Facilitating, or Condoning Improper, Illegal, and Unconstitutional Investigative Techniques, Providing False Forensic Testimony and Failure to Supervise, Discipline and Train

Requests for dismissal

On, June 19, 2025, county attorneys filed a request for dismissal of the suit against Colquitt County.

In the dismissal request, it stated, “As will be shown by state law, Colquitt County, Georgia has no legal affiliation with the state of Georgia or the city of Moultrie, Georgia, such that either the state or city could make policy for Colquitt County. Rather, under state law the county is an entirely separate entity and had no role in the prosecution of the criminal case described in plaintiff’s Complaint.”

On June 13, 2025, attorneys for the City of Moultrie and the Moultrie Police Department also filed a request for dismissal.

In their dismissal request, it stated, “Here, Plaintiff’s complaint does not include sufficient factual allegations to state a claim to relief as it relates to Plaintiff’s claims against the City. In addition, Plaintiff’s claims against the Police Department are subject to dismissal because the Police Department is not an entity capable of being sued.”

In July, Moore’s attorneys filed an amendment to the original complaint in response to those motions.

Asking for redress

The complaint stated, “This is Sedrick Moore’s effort to obtain justice and accountability after being wrongfully incarcerated for 23 years. He seeks compensation, to the extent possible, for the harms he suffered, and deterrence, so that what happened to him does not happen to anyone ever again in the State of Georgia.

The amended complaint also stated, “Because of the immense pressure from the public, Defendants pursued a conviction against Sedrick Moore by any means necessary, falsifying evidence, committing perjury, and bargaining for false testimony.”

United States District Judge Amy Totenberg denied both the County and City’s requests for dismissal due to the fact that Moore had amended his complaint within the 21 days allowed for a plaintiff to amend a complaint after getting a response from a defendant or defendants.

Moore has requested the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia to:

• Hold a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

• Award nominal, compensatory, special, and punitive damages to Plaintiff against Defendants in an amount to be proven at trial.

•Award Plaintiff attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and O.C.G.A. §13-6-11.

•Tax all costs of this action against Defendants.

•Award any additional or alternative legal or equitable relief that is just and appropriate.