Billings v. State
293 Ga. 99
Ga.2013Background
- Gunn was killed by a single gunshot; the murder occurred at a townhouse garage during a move-in scene at around 3:00 a.m. on June 21, 2009.
- Gunn’s missing .38 revolver and a shell found outside the garage tied to the crime; investigators posited it may have ricocheted or been kicked out by paramedics.
- Billings and Ross were later involved in a separate incident with Clark Atlanta University police; Billings fired, Ross did not, and Gunn’s revolver was found in Ross’s possession.
- Billings admitted to various crimes including taking Gunn’s gun and later firing into the air; Billings’s statements evolved after forensic evidence indicated the victim was shot from the driver’s side of the truck.
- A number of other acts were introduced at trial (Ridley shooting, girlfriend’s statements about prior shooting) to establish context for Billings’s guilt; Ross’s involvement rested on similar but separate theories.
- Appellants were convicted at joint trial; Billings’s sentences were affirmed, Ross’s sentences were vacated and remanded for proper resentencing due to mis-merger and sentencing structure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Billings and Ross were guilty beyond reasonable doubt. | Challenged sufficiency or credibility of some linking facts. | Evidence was sufficient to support guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Ross sentencing mergers | Consecutive or merged counts were properly structured. | Trial court improperly merged burglary/vehicle counts with felony murder counts. | Ross’s sentences vacated and remanded for proper resentencing due to improper mergers. |
| Similar-transaction evidence admissibility | Ridley shooting evidence admissible against Billings as similar-transaction. | Evidence should be excluded or limited due to prejudice. | Any error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; not reversible. |
| Confrontation/Bruton issues with Ross’s girlfriend testimony | Co-defendant statements implicating Billings should be barred. | Statements were testimonial or improperly admitted. | Statements were non-testimonial; admissible under hearsay exceptions; Bruton not applicable. |
| Ineffective assistance claim and remand scope | Billings raised new grounds for ineffective assistance post-hearing. | Waiver and preservation issues should allow remand for new evidence. | Remand denied; appellate-waiver standards apply; issues sufficiently addressed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency standard for evidence)
- Lindsey v. State, 282 Ga. 447 (Ga. 2007) (harmless-error test for nonconstitutional errors)
- Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (U.S. 1968) (Bruton rule on co-defendant confessions)
- Glover v. State, 285 Ga. 461 (Ga. 2009) (Confrontation Clause scope and non-testimonial statements)
- Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (U.S. 2006) (testimonial vs. non-testimonial statements)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (reliability of testimonial evidence)
- Colton v. State, 292 Ga. 509 (Ga. 2013) (test for Bruton applicability and co-conspirator statements)
- Yancey v. State, 292 Ga. 812 (Ga. 2013) (effective assistance and standard of review)
- Dunn v. State, 291 Ga. 551 (Ga. 2012) (waiver and preservation of ineffective-assistance claims)
- Whitehead v. State, 287 Ga. 242 (Ga. 2010) (preservation of trial objections for appeal)
- Moon v. State, 288 Ga. 508 (Ga. 2011) (severance and joinder considerations)
- Hightower v. State, 263 Ga. 375 (Ga. 1993) (discretion in severance rulings)
- Herbert v. State, 288 Ga. 843 (Ga. 2011) (factors in severance and trial fairness)
- Stokes v. State, 281 Ga. 875 (Ga. 2007) (mistrial and curative instructions; preservation)