Booker v. State
322 Ga. App. 257
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Home invasion in Columbia County, Sept 24, 2008, at ~2:00 a.m., resulting in the decedent’s death and injuries to the girlfriend and infant.
- Defendants include Patrick Antwon Booker; jury convicted Booker of burglary, armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, kidnapping, possession of a firearm during a crime, and possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer; malice murder and felony murder counts were not convicting and latter mistrial declared.
- Evidence linked Booker to the crime via vehicle description (red/burgundy Camaro), show-up identifications by the decedent’s girlfriend, glove matching, and a hollow-point cartridge found in the Camaro.
- Booker initially denied involvement after Miranda warnings; later admitted to driving other armed men to the trailer park but denied exiting the Camaro.
- Booker challenged (1) sequestration instruction as improper expression of opinion, (2) jury instructions on malice and felony murder for not including not-guilty verdict instructions, (3) ineffective assistance for failing to object to the sequestration explanation and to the murder-charge instructions.
- Trial court denied motions; appellate court affirmed Judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sequestration instruction constituted reversible error? | Booker argues the court’s sua sponte sequestration guidance bolstered State witnesses. | State contends instruction was neutral, not expressing opinion. | No error; instruction was neutral and compliant with OCGA 17-8-57. |
| Plain error in malice murder/felony murder charge for verdict entry guidance? | Booker claims improper guidance on guilty verdict without not-guilty option. | State argues no plain error since Booker wasn’t convicted of those counts. | No plain error; no impact on outcome as Booker was acquitted on those offenses. |
| Ineffective assistance based on objections to sequestration and murder-charge instructions? | Booker claims counsel should have objected, altering trial proceedings. | Objections would have been meritless given no error. | No deficient performance; no prejudice since rulings were proper and no impact on outcome. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sauerwein v. State, 280 Ga. 438 (Ga. 2006) (statutory requirement for not expressing opinion in court proceedings)
- Gardner v. State, 286 Ga. 633 (Ga. 2010) (requirement to avoid prejudicial court commentary)
- Watson v. State, 278 Ga. 763 (Ga. 2004) (charge on sequestration did not violate statute)
- Rogers v. State, 294 Ga. App. 195 (Ga. App. 2008) (sequestration rulings consistent with precedent)
- Jackson v. State, 316 Ga. App. 588 (Ga. App. 2012) (plain error standard for challenged jury instructions)
- White v. State, 291 Ga. 7 (Ga. 2012) (plain error analysis and harmless error considerations)