Robinson v. State

Decision Date08 February 2016
Docket NumberNo. S15A1912.,S15A1912.
Citation782 S.E.2d 657,298 Ga. 455
Parties ROBINSON v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Steven Lee Sparger, Savannah, for appellant.

Aimee F. Sobhani, Asst. Atty. Gen., Samuel S. Olens, Atty. Gen., Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Atty. Gen., Paula Khristian Smith, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Department of Law, Margaret Ellen Heap, Dist. Atty., Lyndsey Hurst Rudder, Asst. Atty. Gen., Office of the District Attorney Eastern Judicial Circuit, for appellee.

MELTON, Justice.

Following a jury trial, Anthony Threatt Robinson appeals his convictions for felony murder predicated on criminal attempt to commit armed robbery, fleeing and attempting to elude a police officer, obstruction of a police officer, and making false statements. Robinson contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts, that the trial court made numerous errors regarding evidence and jury instructions, and that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance.1 For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

1. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the record shows that Robinson and Benjamin Carter had been close friends for many years. On September 25, 2012, an individual, later identified as Carter from surveillance footage, entered the Coastal Gold Exchange (CGE), a business that bought precious metals. Carter pulled a gun on a CGE employee, Jimmie Skelton, and stole approximately $2,000. No one was ever arrested for this robbery, but there was evidence that Robinson and Carter used their cell phones in the vicinity of CGE around the time that the robbery occurred. In addition, on September 27, 2012, Dionne Polite–Brown, an acquaintance of Robinson and Carter, heard Robinson tell Carter and others that he and Carter had a " good lick" or a "sweet lick," apparently a reference to the September 25th robbery.2

On the morning of September 27, 2012, Robinson told Antwan Williams, the mother of one of his children, that he was going to procure money for their son. Later that day, Carter and Robinson picked up Jessica Hamilton, the mother of Carter's child, in a black truck. Hamilton heard Robinson tell Carter he needed to get money for his son's mother. After dropping Hamilton off, Carter went to the home of Nicole Owens, who testified that Carter was flustered and wearing a pistol on his side.

On the afternoon of September 27, 2012, Carter entered CGE while Timothy Johnson, the owner of the business, was working alone. Following the robbery that had occurred two days earlier, Johnson reviewed security footage from the store and studied the features and image of the robber. As a result, Johnson became suspicious when Carter walked into the store. Johnson warned Carter that he knew who he was, and Johnson placed his hand on a gun that he was carrying.

Carter then fled the business, and Johnson pursued. Carter ran behind the shopping center where CGE was located. Johnson testified that, as Carter was fleeing, Carter kept turning and looking back at him. At that time, Johnson noticed that Carter had a gun on his side. Johnson testified that he felt his life was in danger. Based on this belief, Johnson drew his gun and shot Carter in the back. Wounded but still mobile, Carter jumped into the black truck that Robinson had parked in an alley near CGE. Robinson drove the truck away, and Johnson reported the events to a 911 operator. In the area where Carter had fled, Johnson found a loaded gun lying in the grass. Polite–Brown testified that she had previously seen Robinson with the same gun.

Shortly after the robbery, police in marked vehicles began pursuit of the truck driven by Robinson. Robinson, however, attempted to elude police and started running stop signs. Eventually, Robinson crashed the truck into a house, exited the vehicle, and ran down the street until he was apprehended. Robinson did not immediately inform police that Carter was still in the truck and needed medical assistance. Carter later died of a gunshot wound to the back.

This evidence was sufficient to enable the jury to find Robinson guilty of the crimes for which he was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).

Nonetheless, Robinson contends that there was insufficient evidence to prove that (a) he was a party to the crime of attempted robbery and (b) his actions were a proximate cause of Carter's death. We cannot agree.

Pursuant to OCGA § 16–2–20(a), "[e]very person concerned in the commission of a crime is a party thereto and may be ... convicted of commission of the crime." Robinson argues that the State presented only circumstantial evidence that did not exclude every other reasonable hypothesis except that of his guilt as a party to the crime, as required by OCGA § 24–14–6.3 "[Q]uestions as to the reasonableness of hypotheses other than the guilt of the defendant are generally for the jury to decide, and this Court will not disturb a finding of guilt unless the evidence is insupportable as a matter of law." (Citation omitted.) Lowe v. State, 295 Ga. 623, 625(1), 759 S.E.2d 841 (2014). Furthermore, this Court will not resolve evidentiary conflicts and inconsistencies. See Flowers v. State, 275 Ga. 592(1), 571 S.E.2d 381 (2002). Mere presence at the scene of the crime and mere approval of a criminal act are insufficient to establish that a defendant was a party to the crime. "Proof that the defendant shares a common criminal intent with the actual perpetrators is necessary." (Citation omitted.) Eckman v. State, 274 Ga. 63, 65(1), 548 S.E.2d 310 (2001). But such shared criminal intent "may be inferred from the defendant's conduct before, during, and after the crime." (Citation omitted.) Id.

The record in this case shows that Robinson: (1) stated a desire and intention to procure money for one of his children; (2) drove Carter to the vicinity of CGE; (3) parked in a nearby alley prior to the robbery and waited for Carter to return; (4) drove Carter away from the scene, thereby fulfilling the role of a getaway driver; (5) fled erratically from police, running stop signs and crashing the truck into a home; (6) failed to tell police that Carter had been shot and remained in the truck; and (7) misled police about his close relationship with Carter. Furthermore, the evidence revealed that Robinson had previously been seen with the gun that Carter dropped on the ground after the September 27th attempted armed robbery. Based on these facts, the jury was presented with sufficient evidence to find Robinson guilty as a party to the crime of attempted robbery. See, e.g., Wise v. State, 325 Ga.App. 377(1), 752 S.E.2d 628 (2013).

Robinson also maintains that his felony murder conviction must be reversed because the evidence was insufficient to show that his acts were a proximate cause of Carter's death.

When construing Georgia's felony murder statute, this Court has held that causing the death of another human being means proximate causation. State v. Jackson, 287 Ga. 646(2), 697 S.E.2d 757 (2010). "Proximate causation imposes liability for the reasonably foreseeable results of criminal ... conduct if there is no sufficient, independent, and unforeseen intervening cause." Id. at 654 . We consider the elements of the felony not in the abstract, but in the actual circumstances in which the felony was committed. Davis v. State, 290 Ga. 757, 760(4), 725 S.E.2d 280 (2012).

(Footnote and emphasis omitted.)

Currier v. State, 294 Ga. 392, 394(1), 754 S.E.2d 17 (2014). Furthermore, "[w]hat constitutes proximate cause is undeniably a jury question and is always to be determined on the facts of each case upon mixed considerations of logic, common sense, justice, policy, and precedent." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) McGrath v. State, 277 Ga.App. 825, 829, 627 S.E.2d 866 (2006).

Proximate cause exists if Robinson's crime of attempted armed robbery

"directly and materially contributed to the happening of a subsequent accruing immediate cause of the death, or if ... the homicide [was] committed within the res gestae of the felony ... and is one of the incidental, probable consequences of the execution of the design to commit the [predicate felony]." (Citations and punctuation omitted) State v. Jackson, [supra,] 287 Ga. at 652(2) . "The only limitation on the type of felony that may serve as an underlying felony for a felony murder conviction is that the felony must be inherently dangerous to human life." Hulme v. State, 273 Ga. 676, 678(1), 544 S.E.2d 138 (2001). That is, the felony must be dangerous per se or by its circumstances create a foreseeable risk of death. Id.

Davis v. State, 290 Ga. 757, 760(4), 725 S.E.2d 280 (2012).

Here, it was reasonable to foresee that Carter, who was attempting an armed robbery, could be fatally wounded in attempting such a highly dangerous enterprise. As Robinson was a party to the crime of attempted armed robbery, his acts, therefore, were properly found to be a proximate cause of Carter's death, which flowed directly from the dangerous criminal enterprise. Id.

2. Robinson contends that the trial court erred by giving its own instruction on proximate cause to the jury rather than the exact text of the one that he requested, contending that his own instruction would have been "easier for the jury to understand." As Robinson concedes, however, the trial court's instruction was based directly on the language of State v. Jackson, supra. As the trial court's instruction was legally correct, there is no error. Id.

3. Robinson contends that the trial court erred by denying a motion for a mistrial he made during Johnson's testimony about the September 27th robbery. We disagree.

The record shows that, at the start of the earlier robbery on September 25th, the robber approached Skelton, the clerk on duty, and, according to Skelton, the robber asked what kind of gold CGE sold. It further appears that, during the attempted robbery on September 27th, Carter approached Johnson and asked the same...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • Fleming v. United States, No. 14-CF-1074
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • 30 Enero 2020
    ...the defendant's act and becomes the sole cause of death, thus breaking the chain of proximate causation."); Robinson v. State , 298 Ga. 455, 782 S.E.2d 657, 660-62 (2016) ("Proximate causation imposes liability for the reasonably foreseeable results of criminal conduct if there is no suffic......
  • Tucker v. Tucker
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 4 Febrero 2022
    ...claim — if he fails to establish either prong, a reviewing court need not examine the other. See Robinson v. State , 298 Ga. 455, 463 (6), 782 S.E.2d 657 (2016).(a) Jarvis first contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to Hipkiss's improper testim......
  • Hardy v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 25 Abril 2022
    ...claim — if he fails to establish either prong, a reviewing court need not examine the other. See Robinson v. State , 298 Ga. 455, 463 (6), 782 S.E.2d 657 (2016). (a) Hardy argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to follow the mandates of the ADA (and related......
  • State v. Mondor
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 28 Junio 2019
    ...50, and is deeply embedded in Georgia law. See, e.g., Menzies v. State , 304 Ga. 156, 161, 816 S.E.2d 638 (2018) ; Robinson v. State , 298 Ga. 455, 458, 782 S.E.2d 657 (2016) ; Wilson v. State , 297 Ga. 86, 87, 772 S.E.2d 689 (2015). Here, application of those well-established legal princip......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • FELONY MURDER LIABILITY FOR HOMICIDES BY POLICE: TOO UNFAIR & TOO MUCH TO BEAR.
    • United States
    • Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Vol. 113 No. 2, March 2023
    • 22 Marzo 2023
    ...unanimous approach was "compelled by the plain and unambiguous language" of Georgia law. Id. at 768 (Hunstein, J., dissenting). (150) 782 S.E.2d 657, 660-61, 665 (Ga. (151) Id. at 660-61, 665. (152) Id. at 660. (153) Id. (154) Id. (155) Id. (156) Id. (157) Id. at 660-61. (158) Id. at 661 (c......

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