Smith v. State
Decision Date | 21 June 1993 |
Docket Number | No. S93A0889,S93A0889 |
Citation | 430 S.E.2d 579,263 Ga. 224 |
Parties | SMITH v. The STATE. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Gwyn P. Newsom, Maxine Hardy, Columbus, for Smith.
J. Mark Shelnutt, Asst. Dist. Atty., Douglas C. Pullen, Dist. Atty., Columbus, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for the State.
Susan V. Boleyn, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Law, Paige M. Reese, Staff Atty., Atlanta.
After jury trial, appellant was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life. He was also found guilty of and sentenced to a consecutive 5-year term for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Appellant's motion for new trial was denied and he appeals. 1
1. Appellant enumerates the general grounds.
The evidence in this case, although not without conflict, is sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find proof of appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). Miller v. State, 249 Ga. 96, 97-98(1), 287 S.E.2d 543 (1982). See also Roker v. State, 262 Ga. 220(1), 416 S.E.2d 281 (1992).
2. After the denial of his motion to sever for separate trials, appellant was tried jointly with a co-defendant. A statement of the co-defendant, from which all references to appellant's name had been excised, was introduced into evidence. Appellant does not separately enumerate as error the admission of this edited statement of the co-defendant. Instead, he urges only that, even as edited, the co-defendant's statement was so prejudicial as to have mandated the grant of his motion to sever for separate trials. However, Kennedy v. State, 253 Ga. 132, 134(2), 317 S.E.2d 822 (1984). Accordingly, here, as in Jones v. State, 243 Ga. 584, 587(4), 255 S.E.2d 702 (1979),
3. Appellant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel.
Appellant made a pro se motion for new trial on April 10, 1992. On April 17, 1992, new appellate counsel was appointed to represent him. Although the hearing on the motion was not held until January 8, 1993, appellant's new appellate counsel did not raise the ineffectiveness claim by amendment or at the hearing itself. (Emphasis supplied.) White v. Kelso, 261 Ga. 32, 401 S.E.2d 733 (1991). In the instant case, appellant's new appellate counsel participated in the motion for new trial, but did not raise the issue of the effectiveness of appellant's trial counsel. Compare Johnson v. State, 259 Ga. 428, 429(3), 383 S.E.2d 115 (1989). Martin v. State, 204 Ga.App. 782, 787(6), 420 S.E.2d 645 (1992).
4. The jury was comprised of seven whites and five blacks. In selecting this jury, the State had used only nine of its ten peremptory strikes. However, each of the State's nine peremptory strikes was used against a black prospective juror. Relying upon Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), appellant urged that the State had exercised its peremptory strikes in a racially discriminatory manner. However, "the trial court found that a prima facie case had not been made inasmuch as ... the percentage of blacks on the jury was greater than the percentage of blacks in the array." Weems v. State, 262 Ga. 101, 102(2)(a), 416 S.E.2d 84 (1992). The trial court did not, therefore, require the State to explicate the employment of its peremptory strikes and appellant enumerates this ruling as error.
Of the 42 potential jurors, 14 were black. However, the State "exercised all [nine] of its peremptory strikes against black [potential] jurors." (Emphasis supplied.) Weems v. State, supra at 102(2)(a), 416 S.E.2d 84. Thus, the State disproportionately employed 100% of its peremptory strikes against the black prospective jurors who comprised only 33% of the array. Under the mandate of Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42, 112 S.Ct. 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), "where [, as here,] a prosecutor has disproportionately struck members of one race in the exercise of his peremptories, it is not sufficient rebuttal to rely on the composition of the jury as selected." Davis v. State, 263 Ga. 5(10), fn. 3, 426 S.E.2d 844 (1993). Accordingly, the trial court in the instant case erred in relying upon the racial composition of the jury in ruling that the State would not be required to offer anything further in rebuttal. Aldridge v. State, 258 Ga. 75(4), 365 S.E.2d 111 (1988) is not viable authority to the contrary. Aldridge was decided prior to Georgia v. McCollum, supra.
The fact that appellant, co-defendant, the victim and key witnesses were black ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bannister v. State
...State used all or almost all of its strikes to remove all or almost all of a particular cognizable group. See, e.g., Smith v. State , 263 Ga. 224, 226, 430 S.E.2d 579 (1993) ("[T]he State disproportionately employed 100% of its peremptory strikes against the black prospective jurors who com......
-
Brown v. State
...act of passion. Aldridge v. State, 258 Ga. 75, 76(2), 365 S.E.2d 111 (1988), overruled on other grounds, Smith v. State, 263 Ga. 224, 226(4), 430 S.E.2d 579 (1993). 4. Brown further contends that evidence of the alleged molestation should have been admitted to show that he acted without mal......
-
Waddell v. State, A05A1961.
...of showing ineffective assistance of counsel. See Rucker v. State, 270 Ga. 431, 435(6), 510 S.E.2d 816 (1999); Smith v. State, 263 Ga. 224, 225(3), 430 S.E.2d 579 (1993); Parkman v. State, 241 Ga.App. 756, 758(4), 526 S.E.2d 640 Judgment affirmed. PHIPPS and MIKELL, JJ., concur. 1. Manson w......
-
Garlington v. State
...before speaking to police did not render his statement involuntary and inadmissible), overruled on other grounds, Smith v. State, 263 Ga. 224, 226(4), 430 S.E.2d 579 (1993). 36. See Chastain v. State, 196 Ga.App. 50, 51(2), 395 S.E.2d 570 (1990) (trial court found police officers' testimony......