Bradford v. State
299 Ga. 880
Ga.2016Background
- Incident: On April 1, 2011, Thomas E. Bradford (appellant), a contracted truck driver, confronted Raymond Lee (plant manager) about allegedly improper loading; the confrontation escalated into a physical struggle and Lee was shot and killed.
- Eyewitness evidence: Two eyewitnesses testified Bradford pointed a gun, they struggled, Lee began walking away with hands up, Bradford followed and shot Lee. Ballistics matched Bradford’s pistol; medical examiner attributed death to a bullet wound.
- Bradford’s defense: Claimed self-defense and accidental discharge; testified Lee struck him and had previously shown a martial-arts move (nickname “Jet Li”), and that the gun fired unintentionally.
- Procedural posture: Indicted for malice murder, felony murder, and possession of a firearm during a crime; acquitted of malice murder but convicted of felony murder and firearm possession; sentenced to life plus probation; appealed.
- Trial events challenged on appeal: sufficiency of evidence; exclusion of evidence about other employees carrying guns; jury instructions on duty to retreat; untranscribed bench conferences and defendant’s absence from them; prosecutor’s rehabilitative questioning of witnesses (alleged hearsay); jury site visit conduct; and alleged ineffective assistance for not objecting to commentary on pre-arrest silence.
Issues
| Issue | Bradford’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict of felony murder and firearm possession | Evidence was insufficient; shooting accidental or justified self-defense | Eyewitness, ballistics, and medical evidence support convictions; jury could reject defense | Affirmed — evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia |
| Admission of evidence that other plant employees carried firearms | Admitted to show Bradford’s state of mind for carrying a gun | Irrelevant because no other employee was involved; Bradford testified his reason was unrelated | Exclusion upheld — trial court did not abuse discretion |
| Jury charge on duty to retreat (omission of phrase "including deadly force") | Requested instruction including statutory language; omission was erroneous | Court had already charged on deadly force; cross-reference was adequate | Affirmed — charge read as whole correctly explained law |
| Untranscribed bench conferences and defendant excluded | Prejudice and violation of right to be present | Conferences concerned legal/logistical matters; no prejudice shown; defendant could see them and did not request access | No reversible error; defendant’s presence right not violated |
| Prosecutor’s rehabilitative questioning of eyewitnesses (alleged hearsay) | Such questioning was hearsay and improper | Questions rebutted impeachment and did not constitute hearsay under then-applicable statute | Overruled — testimony did not meet hearsay definition under former OCGA § 24-3-1(a) |
| Jury site visit conduct and failure to charge jury about it | Site visit deprived Bradford of communication with counsel and required jury instruction | No contemporaneous objection; review not preserved; plain-error review fails (no clear obvious error) | No relief — issues not preserved and no plain error shown |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to object to prosecutor’s comments on pre-arrest silence | Counsel deficient for not objecting; comments improperly highlighted pre-arrest silence | Bradford called 911 and spoke post-shooting; prosecutor reasonably explored inconsistencies between trial testimony and contemporaneous statements | Denied — no deficient performance or prejudice shown; line of questioning permissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Smith v. State, 292 Ga. 620 (review of evidentiary rulings)
- Woodard v. State, 296 Ga. 803 (review of jury charge as a whole)
- Sinns v. State, 248 Ga. 385 (failure to record bench conference; prejudice requirement)
- Ruffin v. State, 283 Ga. 87 (bench-conference recording precedent)
- Zamora v. State, 291 Ga. 512 (right to be present for bench conference removing juror)
- Heywood v. State, 292 Ga. 771 (bench-conference presence analysis)
- Yancey v. State, 292 Ga. 812 (preservation requirement for site-visit complaints)
- Alvelo v. State, 290 Ga. 609 (plain-error standard for jury instructions)
- Pruitt v. State, 282 Ga. 30 (ineffective assistance two‑prong test)
- Wright v. State, 291 Ga. 869 (ineffective assistance standards)
- Johnson v. State, 292 Ga. 785 (use of prior statements to show inconsistency)
- State v. Sims, 296 Ga. 465 (discussion of evidentiary-code change and Mallory)
- Mallory v. State, 261 Ga. 625 (prohibition on commenting on defendant’s pre-arrest silence under former law)
- Mathis v. State, 279 Ga. 100 (definition of hearsay under former OCGA)
- White v. State, 287 Ga. 713 (related evidentiary precedent)
- Kosturi v. State, 296 Ga. 512 (related precedent)
- Watson v. State, 289 Ga. 39 (preservation of hearsay objections)