Bridges v. State, 314 Ga. 395

On March 1, 2010, Arleshia Bridges followed her husband Anthony Rankins, blocked his path, then shot him multiple times; Rankins died at the scene. A .357 revolver and five empty casings were recovered from Bridges’ coat and vehicle. Ballistics and medical evidence tied the gun to the fatal wounds.
Bridges was indicted on malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during a felony; a jury convicted her at a December 2012 trial.
Sentence: life for malice murder plus five consecutive years for the firearm offense; felony murder vacated and aggravated assault merged for sentencing.
Bridges filed amended motions for new trial (including claims based on her history of abuse and a claimed panic/self‑defense at the moment of shooting); the trial court held a hearing, denied the motion, and Bridges appealed.
On appeal Bridges raised (1) that the trial court should have granted a new trial on the general‑grounds ("thirteenth juror") because evidence of abuse/self‑defense preponderates against the verdict, and (2) that the court erred in striking three prospective jurors (Jurors 16, 46, and 48) for cause.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Bridges)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying a new trial on the general grounds (thirteenth juror)	Evidence of prior physical/sexual abuse and that she shot in panic/self‑defense means the verdict is contrary to the evidence and the court should exercise thirteenth‑juror review to grant a new trial	Trial court properly exercised its discretion, independently weighed credibility and conflicts, and evidence is sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia	Denial affirmed — trial court performed independent review and evidence supported the convictions under Jackson; not an exceptional case warranting new trial
Whether the trial court erred in striking Jurors 16, 46, and 48 for cause	Excusing these jurors deprived Bridges of a fair jury (improper strikes for cause)	Each juror admitted bias or substantial impairment of impartiality (personal relationship or prior domestic‑violence experiences), and the court observed demeanor supporting excusal	Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; each juror’s voir dire showed a substantial impairment to be fair and impartial

Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369 (1993) (felony‑murder vacated where malice murder conviction entered)
Allen v. State, 296 Ga. 738 (2015) (trial court’s thirteenth‑juror discretion and matters it may consider)
Alvelo v. State, 288 Ga. 437 (2011) (new trial on general grounds is an extraordinary remedy; caution urged)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence review)
Dent v. State, 303 Ga. 110 (2018) (appellate review standard when trial court denies general‑grounds new trial)
Fortson v. State, 313 Ga. 203 (2022) (trial court’s independent thirteenth‑juror review upheld)
Burney v. State, 299 Ga. 813 (2016) (trial court’s thirteenth‑juror review and denial affirmed)
Carter v. State, 302 Ga. 685 (2017) (discretion and standard for striking jurors for cause)
Lanier v. State, 310 Ga. 520 (2020) (trial court’s broad discretion to determine juror impartiality and credibility)
DeVaughn v. State, 296 Ga. 475 (2014) (upholding excusal for cause where prospective juror’s experiences could affect impartiality)
Robles v. State, 277 Ga. 415 (2003) (excusal for cause appropriate where jurors said they could not judge or be impartial)
Bell v. State, 276 Ga. 206 (2003) (trial court did not abuse discretion excusing juror who said she could not be fair to the State)