Abney v. State
306 Ga. 448
Ga.2019Background
- In October 2015, James Hampton and Dwayne Abney went to a house in Savannah where three people (Kiana Marshall, Isaiah Martin, Alexis Kitchens) were present; the three victims were shot and killed that night. Hampton and Abney were implicated; Diamond Butler and Bell were associated with the events leading up to the shootings.
- Ballistics at the scene linked 9mm BHA ammunition and a Hi-Point 9mm pistol to the murders; Hampton’s residence contained an empty box of BHA 9mm ammo and a photo of Hampton with a pistol.
- After the murders, Hampton admitted to killing the victims; Abney agreed with Hampton’s account, and both made inculpatory statements to fellow inmates.
- Police later pursued Hampton in a Ford Explorer; when an officer activated lights and siren, Hampton accelerated, led police on a chase, stopped the vehicle, and Abney fled on foot; police recovered a .380 handgun along Abney’s flight path.
- Abney was tried jointly with Hampton on a multi-count indictment and convicted of, inter alia, two counts of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault counts, multiple firearm counts, and fleeing/attempting to elude an officer; he was sentenced to consecutive and concurrent life terms and additional terms for firearm and fleeing offenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Abney) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for fleeing/attempting to elude (OCGA § 40-6-395) | Abney: was only a passenger; no evidence he encouraged Hampton to flee, so cannot be convicted of eluding | State: passenger can be convicted as party if he aided/abetted or intentionally advised/encouraged driver; Abney fled on foot and accepted Hampton’s suggestion to run | Court: Affirmed — evidence supported conviction as party to fleeing given flight on foot, concerted criminal conduct, and Abney’s affirmative response to run |
| Motion for mistrial after witness (Cowherd) testified about Hampton’s statements despite in limine ruling | Abney: Cowherd’s testimony implied Abney’s involvement ("they done killed them"); violated in limine order and warranted mistrial | State: in limine precluded mention of Abney by name; Cowherd complied and did not name Abney; other independent evidence tied Abney to crimes | Court: Denial of mistrial not an abuse of discretion; no clear violation and independent evidence linked Abney |
| Alleged improper bolstering — detective’s testimony about Butler’s prior consistent statements | Abney: lead detective impermissibly bolstered Butler’s credibility by testifying to her prior consistent statements | State: prior statements were admissible to rebut implied charge of recent fabrication/improper motive; Butler’s prior statements predated any plea deal | Court: Overruled objection — prior consistent statements admissible to rehabilitate after attack on motive; no improper bolstering |
| Alleged improper bolstering — detective’s testimony about Washington’s statements | Abney: detective bolstered Washington (inmate who reported Abney’s admission) | State: detective did not relate substance of Washington’s prior consistent statements; testimony described investigative corroboration, not Washington’s credibility | Court: Overruled objection — record does not show admission of prior consistent statements; detective’s investigative corroboration did not constitute improper bolstering |
Key Cases Cited
- McNeely v. State, 296 Ga. 422 (2015) (passenger may be party to fleeing if aided or encouraged driver)
- Westmoreland v. State, 287 Ga. 688 (2010) (party liability can be inferred from conduct before, during, after offense)
- Walter v. State, 304 Ga. 760 (2018) (same — conduct may establish party liability)
- Sapp v. State, 337 Ga. App. 14 (2016) (affirming party liability for fleeing when passenger fled on foot)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency review: verdict must be supported by evidence from which a rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Curry v. State, 305 Ga. 73 (2019) (denial of mistrial reviewed for abuse of discretion; mistrial required only if essential to fair trial)
- Adkins v. State, 301 Ga. 153 (2017) (witness credibility for jury; witnesses cannot be bolstered directly)
- Brown v. State, 302 Ga. 454 (2017) (context controls whether testimony is improper bolstering)
- Dorsey v. State, 303 Ga. 597 (2018) (prior consistent statements admissible to rebut charge of recent fabrication or improper motive)
- Bolling v. State, 300 Ga. 694 (2017) (prior statements made before plea offer admissible to rebut fabrication claim)
- Jones v. State, 299 Ga. 40 (2016) (investigative corroboration testimony does not constitute improper bolstering)
- Moon v. State, 288 Ga. 508 (2011) (questioning witness about plea benefits is classic implication of improper motive)
- Carter v. State, 249 Ga. App. 354 (2001) (reversed fleeing conviction where passenger only occupied seat and did not flee on foot)