Antonio Maurice Gee v. State, A21A0710

Antonio Maurice Gee was convicted by a jury of multiple felonies after a December 2016 home invasion and assault of Jessica Crutchfield and her 70‑year‑old grandmother Janice Bauer, who lived with two small children (an infant and an 18‑month‑old).
Two days after Gee’s release from prison for a prior aggravated stalking conviction involving Crutchfield, he threatened to kill her, forced entry, assaulted both women, tased victims (including rendering the infant unconscious), stabbed Crutchfield, and caused Bauer severe facial fractures.
Police ultimately forced entry after a standoff; Gee surrendered after about five hours. A butterfly knife was recovered in the downstairs bathroom; Gee made post‑Miranda statements claiming blackouts.
Several days after the incident, Bauer’s credit cards, two cell phones, a smart watch, and Crutchfield’s DOC ID were found hidden under furniture in the garage; victims testified those items had been kept in the bedroom and denied placing them in the garage.
Gee was charged with two armed robberies at issue on appeal: Count 8 (taking Crutchfield’s car keys, alleged by use of a knife) and Count 9 (taking Bauer’s credit cards, phones, smart watch, and ID by use of a knife).
On appeal from the denial of his motion for new trial, Gee argued the evidence was insufficient to support the two armed robbery convictions; the Court of Appeals affirmed Count 9, reversed Count 8, and remanded for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Gee)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for armed robbery as to Count 8 (Crutchfield’s keys)	No evidence that Gee used the knife to effectuate taking of the keys; keys may have been taken before weapon was used	Knife was used in the assault and items were in the house; jury could infer contemporaneous use	Reversed: evidence insufficient because it was equally likely keys were taken before knife was used
Sufficiency of evidence for armed robbery as to Count 9 (Bauer’s items)	Similar insufficiency argument: no direct proof knife was used to take Bauer’s items	Items were under Bauer’s control, taken after force; hiding items in garage supports theft after assault and within immediate presence doctrine	Affirmed: evidence supports finding weapon was used prior to or contemporaneous with taking; armed robbery upheld
Standard of review for sufficiency challenges	Jackson standard requires proof beyond reasonable doubt; appellate court should reverse if evidence supports another reasonable hypothesis	Same; defer to jury’s credibility and weight findings under Jackson	Applied Jackson v. Virginia; reviewed evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and deferred to jury credibility findings

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (constitutional standard for sufficiency review)
Hayes v. State, 292 Ga. 506 (2013) (appellate deference to jury on credibility and weight of evidence)
Harrington v. State, 300 Ga. 574 (2017) (use of weapon must occur prior to or contemporaneously with taking for armed robbery)
Benton v. State, 305 Ga. 242 (2019) (broad interpretation of "immediate presence"; victim’s flight does not preclude armed robbery)
Kiser v. State, 327 Ga. App. 17 (2021) (circumstantial evidence and jury’s role in resolving reasonable hypotheses)
Attaway v. State, 332 Ga. App. 375 (2015) (armed robbery insufficient where item was taken before weapon was brandished)
Fox v. State, 289 Ga. 34 (2011) (circumstantial evidence inadequate when two equally reasonable hypotheses exist)
Maddox v. State, 174 Ga. App. 728 (1985) (taking need not be from victim’s person if within immediate presence and victim forced to flee)
Merritt v. State, 353 Ga. App. 374 (2020) (weapon use must precede or coincide with taking; victim’s removal from immediate presence does not negate armed robbery)