Redding v. State

Decision Date13 March 2020
Docket NumberA19A2016
Citation841 S.E.2d 192,354 Ga.App. 525
Parties REDDING v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Stanley W. Schoolcraft III, Stockbridge, for Appellant.

Paul L. Howard Jr., Atlanta, Dustin Jeremiah Lee, for Appellee.

McMillian, Presiding Judge.

In July 2011, a Fulton County grand jury indicted Javorris Redding, along with five co-indictees, on one count of participation in criminal street gang activity, three counts of armed robbery, one count of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.1 Each of Redding’s co-indictees accepted a plea bargain prior to trial. Redding chose to proceed to trial in August 2012 and was convicted on all counts except aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (Count 5). The trial court sentenced Redding to a total of 35 years, with 25 years to be served in confinement. Redding now appeals the denial of his motion for new trial, as amended,2 and asserts the following enumerations of error: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress; (3) the trial court erred in admitting evidence over objection; (4) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; and (5) the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial. For the reasons that follow, we find no error and affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, the record shows that on the night of April 13, 2011, Bryan Stewart and Kevin Culbreath drove around to a few clubs in Culbreath’s car, a black Camaro with red stripes and "Forgiatos," top-of-the-line wheels. When they stopped at a gas station to purchase beer, they met two women who agreed to accompany them to a nearby hotel room at approximately 4:00 a.m. When Stewart realized that the women were not interested in having sex that night, he and Culbreath left to pick up Chantal Jackson, a friend of his, from a club where she worked. After getting something to eat, the three of them returned to the hotel room, where the two women were still waiting. Culbreath ended up on one bed with the two women who were smoking marijuana, and Stewart slept in the other bed with Jackson.

Culbreath stayed up watching a movie and noticed one of the women kept texting someone. When the women got up to leave, one of them stopped at the dresser where the hotel key was laying and fumbled with something there and made a movement as if she were putting something in her purse. Shortly after the women left, Culbreath heard a rattling at the door and then saw the handle start to turn. He jumped up and ran to the door, but as he tried to push the door closed, two men with guns fought their way in. The men spun him around and hit him on the head with a gun. Culbreath went down to the ground, and one of the men put a foot on his neck and told him not to move or he would kill him. They took Culbreath’s pants off him and found the keys to his car. One of the men went over to the other bed and woke up Stewart and Jackson.

Stewart testified at trial that he fell asleep until he felt somebody tugging on his pants leg. He initially thought that Culbreath was just "horsing around," but then he saw two men in the room pointing pistols at them. Stewart was able to get a good look at the man standing over Culbreath until the men told him to turn his head. They took Jackson’s earrings and cell phone, as well as Stewart’s pants, glasses, jacket, and cell phone before stealing Culbreath’s car, which had Jackson’s bag containing her clothing and money in it. After the men left, Stewart saw that Culbreath was bleeding heavily from his head.

Culbreath and Stewart called the police and gave their statements before asking Culbreath’s brother to pick them up so they could get some clothing. Culbreath then called his friends and local tire shops to put the word out that his car had been stolen. In the meantime, Culbreath, his brother, and Stewart drove around to "all the hot spots" and eventually located his car at a car shop parked next to several other cars, including a white Charger and another black Camaro with "stock" parts. There were people standing around outside the shop, but when they saw Culbreath and Stewart, they ran and the white Charger took off. While Culbreath circled the block to try to catch the men who were running, he called police to let them know he had found his stolen car. Culbreath and his friends could not catch the men, and as they were headed back to the Camaro, they stopped when they saw police pull over the white Charger and take the men who were in the car into custody.3 Stewart alerted police that he was able to recognize one of the men taken into custody as one of the men who had robbed them earlier that morning.

After Redding was taken into custody, police recovered two guns from the white Charger, a 9mm Ruger and a .45 Ruger. When Culbreath and Stewart went to the police station to give a statement, they told police that the car shop was very well known to them and that the man who owned the shop was probably going to take the expensive rims off Culbreath’s car and put them on the "stock" Camaro. Police showed Stewart a photographic lineup, and he was able to identify Redding as one of the men who had robbed them. Stewart also identified Redding at trial.

One of the responding detectives also interviewed another suspect who had been detained, Garrett Nash. Nash was the owner of the "stock" Camaro and admitted that he had wanted to purchase the wheels off a stolen car. Police located $4,500 on his person. Nash explained that he had received a text message regarding the wheels, but claimed he did not know who the message was from. He did, however, allow the detective to search his phone. The detective found a text message that said "Say Doe dis Keyon lil brotha I got dem Forgi for u call me asap." The text came through at 6:58 a.m. The armed robbery had been reported at 6:24 a.m. The detective then looked through Nash’s call log and was able to match the name "Redding J" to the number that had sent the text message.4 He then obtained the call logs and text messages for that number on that day.

The State also introduced the testimony of an expert on criminal street gangs who explained the various criteria that law enforcement use to determine whether someone is a member of a gang. He testified that a gang called "30 Deep" was formed in 2004 in the Mechanicsville neighborhood in southwest Atlanta as a Bloods "set."5 Its members have committed a large number of crimes, both in and outside their community, including armed robberies, car thefts, carjackings, and violent assaults. Another group called "Goodfellaz" began in the prison system in the early 2000s. Although that group denies that it is a traditional gang, it is structured after a "mob style" criminal organization to generate money through criminal activity. The founding member of Goodfellaz was Javorris Redding’s older brother, George Redding, known as "Keon," who police believe was also the leader of 30 Deep. Police discovered that a number of 30 Deep gang members were also members of the Goodfellaz.

Another gang investigator explained that in the early part of 2011, she had been investigating the shooting of a star witness just prior to the trial of a known 30 Deep member, Jonathan Redding. As part of her efforts to collect gang intel, she downloaded and maintained a file of photographs and videos of known 30 Deep members from online social media sites, showing various gang signs, nicknames, and terminology. Several of these photographs were admitted into evidence at trial, including ones that showed Javorris Redding and known 30 Deep members holding up gang signs. The State also admitted a Goodfellaz video depicting, among other known gang members, George "Keon" Redding, Jonathon Redding (who was on trial for murder at that time), and Javorris Redding wearing a red bandana associated with the Bloods gang.

As part of a separate investigation, police had initiated three wire taps in March 2011 to record conversations between members of 30 Deep and Goodfellaz. Police were able to determine that two of the telephone numbers belonged to Redding and that he went by the nickname "Moblife." Copies of the recordings were admitted into evidence, and portions of the conversations between Redding and several other known gang members were played for the jury at trial. Multiple recordings included discussions about getting guns and committing various crimes, including robbery.

While investigating the armed robbery reported in this case, a gang expert with the Atlanta Police Department determined that Redding was a member of both 30 Deep and Goodfellaz. This determination was based, in part, on the fact that Redding had previously been arrested along with other known members of 30 Deep and entered a guilty plea on participation in a criminal street gang. In addition, Redding had several fairly prominent tattoos indicating gang membership, most notably a "GF" tattoo on his throat associated with the Goodfellaz. After Redding was convicted, this appeal followed.

1. In his first five enumerations of error, Redding challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, we determine "whether a rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." Thomas v. State , 300 Ga. 433, 436 (1), 796 S.E.2d 242 (2017). In doing so, we do not "reweigh evidence or resolve conflicts in testimony; instead, evidence is reviewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, with deference to the jury’s assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Id.

a. Redding first asserts that the evidence was insufficient to prove his conviction for criminal street gang activity because the armed robberies charged in Counts 2, 3, and 4 were an "isolated incident," and the State failed to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Intemann v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 22 Febrero 2021
    ...S.E.2d 362. A trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence is reviewed for a clear abuse of discretion. Redding v. State , 354 Ga. App. 525, 534 (3), 841 S.E.2d 192 (2020). Prior to the admission of the Tweets, Contee testified that he had been friends with Intemann since middle scho......
  • Vazquez v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 1 Febrero 2021
    ...with that action, he must renew the objection or motion." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Id. ; see also Redding v. State , 354 Ga. App. 525, 536 (4), 841 S.E.2d 192 (2020) ; Pickard v. State , 257 Ga. App. 642, 644 (2), 572 S.E.2d 660 (2002).7 In this case, despite his initial motion f......
  • Brown v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 26 Enero 2022
    ... ... 736 (1) (832 S.E.2d 354) (2019) ... Indeed, "[t]he fact that the jury resolved the conflicts ... in the evidence or credibility of the witnesses adversely to ... [Brown] does not render the evidence insufficient." ... (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Redding v ... State, 354 Ga.App. 525, 532 (1) (c) (841 S.E.2d 192) ... (2020). Moreover, the uncertainty of D. H.'s out-of-court ... identification does not warrant the reversal of Brown's ... conviction. See Merritt v. State, 300 Ga.App. 515, ... 516-517 (1) (685 S.E.2d 766) ... ...
  • Lucas v. Charles Schwab & Co.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 13 Marzo 2020
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT