Blackmon v. State, 306 Ga. 90

On April 29, 2015, Bobbie Blackmon was shot and later died; her husband Danny Blackmon was indicted for murder and related offenses.
Witness Christina Turner (Bobbie’s niece) testified about statements Bobbie made during an attempted flight from Blackmon and after returning home, including expressions of fear and statements that she would not leave that night.
Blackmon admitted shooting Bobbie but claimed the shooting was accidental while he had the shotgun under his chin and the slide closed on his thumb.
Physical evidence: a spent shotgun slug consistent with a fairly level shotgun position, blood, and five long guns in the bedroom; methamphetamine was found on Blackmon.
Trial jury convicted Blackmon of felony murder and other counts; he appealed, arguing (1) the court abused its discretion by admitting hearsay statements of the victim, and (2) the trial court relied on facts not in evidence when denying his motion for new trial.

Issue	State's Argument	Blackmon's Argument	Held
Admissibility of Bobbie’s out-of-court statements under the excited-utterance exception	Statements were made shortly after a startling event (interception and threat on roadway and later porch conduct) and thus admissible to show her fear and the circumstances	Statements were not excited utterances because they were not contemporaneous or showed sufficient distress	Court upheld admission: trial court did not abuse discretion; totality of circumstances supported excited-utterance exception
Applicability of residual hearsay exception	Not necessary because statements were covered by excited-utterance exception	Argued statements should not have been admitted at all (and residual exception was improperly applied)	Court noted residual exception applies only to statements not covered elsewhere; excited-utterance covered these statements, so residual not needed
Trial court’s reliance on factual findings in order denying new trial	Turner testified Appellant threatened to shoot the car on the roadway; the court reasonably inferred Bobbie heard the threat and was under stress when she made statements	Court relied on facts not in evidence (claimed Turner did not testify about the roadway threat or Bobbie hearing it)	Court affirmed: Turner did testify to the roadway threat and the inference that Bobbie heard it was reasonable; findings not clearly erroneous

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutional standard for sufficiency of evidence to support conviction)
Robbins v. State, 300 Ga. 387 (discussing excited-utterance timing and totality-of-circumstances analysis)
Ledford v. United States, 443 F.3d 702 (excited-utterance and statements offered to show state of mind)
Woodward v. Williams, 263 F.3d 1135 (victim’s statement that assailant would kill her admissible as excited utterance)
United States v. Belfast, 611 F.3d 783 (excited-utterance may be timely even if not contemporaneous; look to totality of circumstances)
Carter v. State, 302 Ga. 200 (defining hearsay under OCGA § 24-8-801 and use of federal decisions for guidance)
Lewis v. State, 277 Ga. 534 (trial court findings on motion for new trial upheld unless clearly erroneous)