Allen v. State, 300 Ga. 500

On Jan. 18, 2009, appellant Superiore Allen, Brandon Norwood, and Santonio Lucas arranged a fake drug deal to rob two dealers; both victims (Vandit Patel and Jimmy Prak) were shot and killed.
Trial evidence placed Allen at the scene: he chased and shot Patel, punched/kicked him, then shot Prak in the head; medical testimony attributed Patel’s lethal wound to Allen’s gunshot.
Defendants were jointly indicted on multiple counts including two counts of malice murder, various felony murder counts, aggravated assault, armed robbery, and two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime (Counts 14 and 15).
At a February 2012 joint trial, the jury convicted Allen of malice murder and related offenses (acquitted on the armed robbery counts); the court later imposed consecutive life sentences and entered judgment on one of the duplicative firearm counts.
Allen appealed, arguing (1) insufficient evidence of his role, (2) trial court error in denying dismissal of Counts 14 and 15, and (3) Bruton confrontation-clause error from admission of a co-defendant’s out-of-court statement (State’s Exhibit 102).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence	State: evidence (eyewitnesses, medical examiner) supports convictions	Allen: witnesses speculative, State failed to prove his role	Affirmed — viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict, jury could convict under Jackson v. Virginia standard
Validity of Counts 14 & 15 (firearm during commission) — form/duplication	State: counts sufficiently charge firearm possession during felony; one conviction suffices	Allen: counts identical, fail to name victim, jury could not distinguish, should be dismissed	Denied — general demurrer meritless; special demurrer forfeited by late filing; only one sentence entered for duplicative counts
Timeliness of special demurrer	State: defendant waived arraignment date triggered deadline; motion filed too late	Allen: sought clarification which trial court denied	Forfeited — failure to timely file special demurrer under OCGA §17-7-110; no extension shown
Bruton / Confrontation Clause re: Exhibit 102	Allen: Norwood’s statement embedded in the exhibit directly inculpated him; admitting it violated Bruton	State: the embedded statement was non-testimonial and admissible (prior inconsistent + co-conspirator exception)	Affirmed — Norwood’s remark was non-testimonial, so Bruton does not apply; admission also admissible under hearsay exceptions

Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (establishing confrontation rule for co-defendant confessions in joint trials)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for evaluating sufficiency of the evidence)
Norwood v. State, 297 Ga. 226 (affirming Norwood’s convictions based on same evidence)
Billings v. State, 293 Ga. 99 (Bruton inapplicable to non-testimonial co-defendant statements)
Favors v. State, 296 Ga. 842 (defining testimonial statements by primary purpose test)
Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (jury credibility determinations govern conflicts in testimony)
Lowe v. State, 276 Ga. 538 (test for sufficiency of an indictment against a general demurrer)
Dorsey v. State, 279 Ga. 534 (analysis of general demurrer — can admission of alleged facts still leave defendant innocent?)
Dasher v. State, 285 Ga. 308 (untimely special demurrer waives right to perfect indictment)
Sutton v. State, 295 Ga. 350 (application of Bruton principles in Georgia)