Walker v. State

Decision Date22 January 1993
Docket NumberNo. S92P1347,S92P1347
Citation424 S.E.2d 782,262 Ga. 694
PartiesWALKER v. The STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Stephen R. Patton, Columbus, Stephen B. Bright, Charlotta Norby, Atlanta, for Walker.

Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Peggy R. Katz, Staff Atty., Atlanta, J. Gray Conger, Asst. Dist. Atty., Douglas C. Pullen, Dist. Atty., Columbus.

Joseph L. Chambers, Sr., Prosecuting Attys.' Council, Smyrna, Patsy Morris, Atlanta, Jerry G. Croley, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., Columbus, for the State.

BENHAM, Justice.

This is a case in which a death sentence has been imposed. 1

On August 31, 1988, a convenience store in Columbus, Georgia, was robbed and its clerk shot to death with a .22 caliber gun. 2 A store cash register taken in the robbery was recovered in a garbage dumpster. Store surveillance cameras placed outside and inside the store were connected to a time-lapse video recorder producing a series of still pictures, cycled between the cameras inside and outside the store. The shooting does not appear, but the pictures do show a man wearing a shower cap first standing in front of the register in the presence of the clerk, and later standing behind the register alone.

Three men were arrested for the crime and, although one of the three confessed, all three were later released: the confessor repudiated his confession, claiming he had confessed to obtain the reward money so he could buy drugs. An informant later told the police that appellant was the man in the videotape and that appellant admitted killing the clerk and stealing the cash register. After his arrest, Walker at first denied being in the store. When he was shown a picture of himself standing in front of the counter, he admitted being in the store but denied doing anything except buying a quart of oil. However, after viewing another picture showing him standing behind the counter, he stated that while two men held the clerk in the back of the store and tried to force the clerk to divulge the location of the store's safe, he ran behind the counter and stole a pack of cigarettes. Still later, after learning that Bobby Buck had told police he had loaned a .22 caliber pistol to appellant, Walker once again changed his story, claiming that the two robbers ordered him to pick up the register and that he did so momentarily, then set it down and left. He said the robbers were Bobby Buck and his brother, although he had earlier said one of the robbers was a man named "Lamar."

1. The evidence is sufficient to meet the standard of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). See Prince v. State, 257 Ga. 84, 85, 355 S.E.2d 424 (1987).

2. In his first enumeration of error, Walker contends the trial court erred by refusing to excuse a prospective juror who was good friends with the victim's family and with the district attorney, and who had experienced a loss similar to that suffered by the victim's family.

The juror testified that his father-in-law was murdered in a grocery-store holdup years ago, that the killers were never apprehended, and that the crime still "weighs heavily" on his mind. In his capacity as Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development for Muscogee County, the juror has worked with the trial judge for "many years." He knows everyone in the district attorney's office and considers himself a "very close" friend of the district attorney. He has also socialized "many times" with the victim's family, describing the victim's father as "a good friend of a very good friend of mine."

The juror conceded that his close friendship with the district attorney would incline him toward the state's case. Moreover, he described himself as having "a lot of empathy" for the victim's family. Because of his friendship with them and his personal experience with a similar crime, he said he

couldn't sit here and say that it would not influence me somewhat. I would have to admit that because I've seen what it's done to my wife's family and the [victim's family].

The juror also testified that, because of his friendship with many law enforcement officers, he would tend to believe a police officer's testimony over a lay person and would be "prone" to believe a law officer rather than a criminal defendant.

After appellant elicited the foregoing, the court asked the juror if he could lay aside his "feelings for the victim's family" and his "acquaintances with the people in the District Attorney's office" and decide the case based on the evidence presented at trial. The juror at first answered, "I think I could," but when the trial court suggested, "you've got to be more reassuring than that," the juror stated: "I could." Based on that answer, the trial court denied appellant's challenge for cause.

As we held in Lively v. State, 262 Ga. 510(1), 421 S.E.2d 528 (1992):

When ruling on a potential juror's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Willis v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • October 22, 2018
    ...271 Ga. 783, 783-784 (1), 523 S.E.2d 294 (1999) ; Menefee v. State, 270 Ga. 540, 542 (2), 512 S.E.2d 275 (1999) ; Walker v. State, 262 Ga. 694, 696 (2), 424 S.E.2d 782 (1993) ; Hayes v. State, 261 Ga. 439, 441 (2), 405 S.E.2d 660 (1991) ; Pope v. State, 256 Ga. 195, 202 (7) (e), 345 S.E.2d ......
  • Brannan v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • March 25, 2002
    ..."rehabilitated" these prospective jurors by asking them questions designed to ensure that they were qualified. See Walker v. State, 262 Ga. 694(2), 424 S.E.2d 782 (1993); Cannon v. State, 250 Ga. App. 777(1), 552 S.E.2d 922 (2001); Walls v. Kim, 250 Ga.App. 259, 549 S.E.2d 797 (2001). The v......
  • Braley v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 12, 2002
    ...to determine the juror[s'] impartiality.'" Brannan v. State, 275 Ga. 70, 77-78(6), 561 S.E.2d 414 (2002) (quoting Walker v. State, 262 Ga. 694, 696(2), 424 S.E.2d 782 (1993)). 13. Prospective juror Remick's voir dire responses demonstrated that he would be able and willing to consider all t......
  • Carr v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • February 3, 1997
    ...circumstances supporting disqualification, without making additional factual findings in support of the ruling. Walker v. State, 262 Ga. 694(2), 424 S.E.2d 782 (1993); Lively v. State, 262 Ga. 510(1), 421 S.E.2d 528 (1992). Unlike the prospective jurors in Lively and Walker, Myra Bittick wa......
  • 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