Johnson v. State
| Decision Date | 21 September 2021 |
| Docket Number | S21A0807 |
| Parties | JOHNSON v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Steven Eric Phillips, Office of the Public Defender, 100 Peachtree Street, Suite 1600, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, Brian Steel, The Steel Law Firm, P.C., 1800 Peachtree Street, N.W., Suite 300, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, for Appellant.
Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula Khristian Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, William C. Enfinger, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Office of The Attorney General, 40 Capitol Square, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30334, Fani T. Willis, District Attorney, Lyndsey Hurst Rudder, Deputy D.A., Ruth M. Pawlak, A.D.A., Fulton County District Atorney's Office, 136 Pryor Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, for Appellee.
Appellant Raphael Johnson was convicted of the malice murder of Frederick Burke, the felony murder of James Cornelius, and other crimes in connection with a shooting incident at a "gambling house" on August 13, 2013, and the aggravated battery of Ahmed Rayner in connection with another shooting at a restaurant a week later. In his appeal to this Court, Appellant contends that the evidence presented at his trial was legally insufficient to support his convictions for the aggravated battery of Rayner, that the trial court's jury instruction on aggravated assault constituted plain error, and that the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that evidence of another shooting incident that occurred a few hours before the gambling house shootings was admissible as intrinsic evidence. As explained below, we reject these contentions and affirm Appellant's convictions, except for his conviction for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, which we vacate to correct a merger error.1
1. The evidence presented at Appellant's trial showed the following.
In August 2013, James Cornelius operated an illegal "gambling house" where people met to play high-stakes card games and use gambling machines in a building on Lee Street in Atlanta. On the night of August 12, Cornelius's grandson Bryan Cornelius ("Bryan") and his friend Frederick Burke were working at the gambling house.
At trial, Bryan testified as follows. Late that night, Quinton Porter, who frequented the gambling house and whom Bryan knew only as "Big Boo," walked outside to the parking lot, where he spoke with some men who had arrived in a silver Ford Taurus. Three of the men in the Taurus came to the door of the gambling house. Burke assumed that the men were with Big Boo, let them in, and then went outside. Bryan was inside. A few minutes later, one of the men pulled out "a gun," pointed it at Bryan, and said Bryan ran toward the assailant, slamming him against the door, and the assailant started shooting. As Bryan pulled out his own gun, he was shot, and he fell to the ground. The assailant pointed his gun at Bryan's head and said, "Let it go, let it go right now or I will kill you." Bryan dropped his gun. Burke then opened the door, and the assailant shot Burke several times. The assailant took Bryan's gun; Bryan heard him and the other two men go toward the back of the building. A short time later, the three men stepped over Bryan as they left the building and fled in the Taurus. Bryan then saw Cornelius, who was near the back of the building, grab his chest and fall to the floor. Someone at the gambling house called 911.2
Burke, Cornelius, and Bryan were taken to a hospital. Burke and Cornelius died several days later. Burke's autopsy showed that he was shot multiple times and died from complications of gunshot wounds to his torso; no bullets were recovered from his body. Cornelius's autopsy showed that he died from a heart attack caused by the stressful criminal event. Bryan was shot at least four times; he ultimately recovered, although it was nearly two years before he could walk again. A .45-caliber bullet was removed from Bryan's body while he was being treated at the hospital. A crime scene investigator found a .45-caliber bullet, two .45-caliber shell casings, and two .40-caliber shell casings at the gambling house.
In the days after the shootings, Bryan's father showed Bryan two photos on the father's cell phone and asked if Bryan recognized anyone. Bryan identified one of the men in the photos as the shooter. During an interview on August 18, Bryan showed a detective the photos, and the detective later determined that the man whom Bryan identified was Appellant. The next day, the detective showed Bryan a photo lineup, and Bryan identified Appellant as the shooter. Bryan repeated that identification at trial.
Another investigator obtained video recordings from surveillance cameras in the parking lot outside the gambling house. The recordings, which the prosecutor accurately described in her opening statement as "grainy," were played during the trial, and Bryan testified about them. The recordings show the following. At 11:13 p.m., a silver Taurus parked near the gambling house, and a tall man, whom Bryan identified at trial as Appellant, got out.3 At least three other men were in the car. Porter and others came outside the gambling house and talked with Appellant for about 30 minutes. At 11:48, Appellant got back in the Taurus, while Porter and another man got in a nearby SUV. At 12:03 a.m., Appellant and two other men got out of the Taurus and walked toward the gambling house. At 12:07, the SUV drove away. At 12:08, Appellant, who was carrying clothing, and the two other men ran back to the Taurus, jumped in, and sped away.
Shortly after 10:00 p.m. on August 20, a week after the shootings at the gambling house, Ahmed Rayner was shot multiple times as he left a restaurant on Peachtree Road in Atlanta. A detective obtained video recordings from the surveillance cameras at the restaurant; the recordings were later played for the jury. The video recordings show the following. At 9:28 p.m., two Dodge Chargers pulled into the restaurant parking lot and parked, one behind the other. A tall man, whom a hostess at the restaurant later identified in a photo lineup and at trial as Appellant, and a shorter man got out of the first Charger and went into the restaurant. About 15 minutes later, the shorter man went back to the first Charger; sat in the passenger seat for a moment; walked toward the other Charger, which was partially out of view of the surveillance cameras; and then returned to the restaurant. Appellant and the shorter man eventually were seated a few tables away from Rayner, who was dining with several other people. At 10:07 p.m., some members of Rayner's party stood up, as if preparing to leave, and about a minute later, Appellant appeared to be talking on his cell phone. At 10:10 p.m., Rayner and his companions exited the restaurant.
Moments later, the second Charger pulled up near the exit, and a man got out of the passenger seat pointing a handgun. Rayner ran back into the restaurant, with the assailant following and shooting. The assailant ran out of the restaurant seconds later and fled in the Charger. Rayner then limped into the dining area, where he fell to the floor. Appellant, who had ducked under a table when the shooting began, appeared to be talking on his cell phone while several bystanders attended to Rayner. The shorter man then went outside and got into the remaining Charger. Appellant exited the restaurant about seven minutes after the shooting. In the parking lot, several members of Rayner's party appeared to speak to Appellant. They then chased him before he got in the Charger, which sped away.
Two responding police officers testified that Rayner had been shot and was taken to a hospital. A crime scene investigator found two .45-caliber shell casings inside the restaurant. Crime scene photographs showed that there were bloodstains on the ground near the entrance to the restaurant and on the carpet in the dining area. The State also introduced into evidence Rayner's medical records, which showed that he suffered gunshot wounds to his right thigh, left buttock, and left thigh.4
Six days after the restaurant shooting, on August 26, police officers arrested Appellant, who was a convicted felon, in a park, where he was hanging out with Latavious Hunter. Hunter was also arrested after he pointed his .45-caliber handgun at the officers.
Appellant was interviewed in connection with the gambling house shootings later that day; the interview was audio and video recorded, and the recording was played for the jury. During the interview, Appellant claimed that he arrived at the gambling house in a gray Nissan Altima around 10:00 p.m. on the night of the shootings; he asked his friend Big Boo (Porter) for $20 so that he could go to a club; and after a few minutes, he left. Appellant denied being a member of a gang or participating in the robbery and shootings, and he told investigators that he had heard that his cousin and two other men committed the crimes.
Ten days later, a detective interviewed Porter, who claimed that his friend "Ralph," whom he identified in a photo lineup as Appellant, came to the gambling house parking lot on the night of the shootings; that he gave Appellant $20 and then left the gambling house; and that he was not involved in planning the robbery. Porter also testified at trial, claiming that he did not remember being at the gambling house on the night of the shootings or being interviewed by the detective.
The State also presented evidence that around 8:30 p.m. on August 12, about three-and-a-half hours before the gambling house shootings, another shooting incident occurred on Boulevard Place in Atlanta. A responding police officer testified that Travis Montford and another man were shot....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harris v. State
... ... See Johnson v. State , 312 Ga. 481, 493, 863 S.E.2d 137 (2021) (holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence over a Rule 403 objection when it was not a "matter of scant or cumulative probative force, dragged in by the heels for the sake of its prejudicial effect") ... ...
-
Albury v. State
... ... at 395-396, 830 S.E.2d 110. In so doing, the trial court implicitly conducted the proper analysis under Rule 403, even though it did not expressly reference that rule. See Johnson v. State , 312 Ga. 481, 494, 863 S.E.2d 137 (2021) ("[W]e see no abuse of discretion in the trial court's implicit conclusion that the probative value of [certain] evidence was not substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect.") (emphasis supplied). We next consider whether the trial court's ... ...
-
Ward v. State
... ... 268 we consider whether any rational jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) ; Johnson v. State , 312 Ga. 481, 487, 863 S.E.2d 137 (2021). "We leave to the jury the resolution of conflicts or inconsistencies in the evidence, credibility of witnesses, and reasonable inferences to be derived from the facts." Smith v. State , 308 Ga. 81, 84, 839 S.E.2d 630 (2020). When properly ... ...
-
Harris v. State
... ... was used to show-in a circumstantial case in which no murder ... weapon was found-that Harris had in his possession ... approximately one week prior to the shootings a type of gun ... that could have been used in those shootings. See Johnson ... v. State, 312 Ga. 481, 493 (863 S.E.2d 137) (2021) ... (holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ... admitting evidence over a Rule 403 objection when it was not ... a "matter of scant or cumulative probative force, ... dragged in by the heels ... ...