Brittian v. State, 299 Ga. 706

On December 8, 2004, Nathaniel Brittian was indicted for malice murder, felony murder (predicated on aggravated assault), aggravated assault, and three counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime.
On November 2, 2004, Brittian brought a concealed handgun to work, approached co-worker Chris McDuffie, and fired six shots; McDuffie died. Brittian admitted shooting but claimed self‑defense.
Jury trial concluded October 31, 2005; Brittian was convicted of all charges; sentenced to life for murder and five consecutive years for one firearm count; felony murder conviction later vacated by operation of law and other counts merged for sentencing.
Brittian filed a motion for continuance after the State added 16 witnesses and while awaiting a psychiatric report; the trial court denied the continuance but delayed swearing the jury and allowed interviews of new witnesses before their testimony.
During voir dire, challenges arose to several jurors (Juror Radford, Juror Adams, Juror Negy); trial counsel used peremptory strikes on Adams and Negy instead of moving to strike for cause.
Posttrial, Brittian sought a new trial and appealed, arguing insufficient assistance of counsel, abuse of discretion in denying continuance, and erroneous handling of juror issues; this Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence / self‑defense	Brittian argued he acted in self‑defense; evidence of self‑defense created reasonable doubt	State argued evidence showed premeditated shooting and jury could reject self‑defense claim	Conviction affirmed; evidence sufficient and jury could reject self‑defense (Jackson v. Virginia standard)
Denial of continuance	Brittian argued denial prejudiced preparation because 16 witnesses were added and psychiatric report was delayed	State/trial court afforded accommodations (delayed swearing, allowed interviews of new witnesses)	No abuse of discretion in denying continuance
Failure to strike Juror Radford for cause	Brittian argued Radford was biased toward police testimony	Radford stated she could be fair and would not believe officer testimony if contradicted; trial court observed demeanor	Court affirmed denial to strike for cause; juror’s statements showed she could be impartial
Ineffective assistance for using peremptory strikes (Adams, Negy)	Brittian argued counsel should have moved to strike these jurors for cause rather than use peremptories, causing prejudice	State showed both jurors said they could be impartial; defendant failed to show they would have been struck for cause	No Strickland prejudice shown; counsel’s use of peremptories was not deficient or prejudicial

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Holmes v. State, 269 Ga. 124 (standard for excusing juror for cause; deference to trial court on demeanor)
Geiger v. State, 295 Ga. 648 (review of continuance denials; abuse of discretion standard)
Ferguson v. State, 297 Ga. 342 (jury’s role in assessing credibility and self‑defense claims)
Wright v. State, 291 Ga. 869 (application of Strickland in Georgia context)
Robinson v. State, 277 Ga. 75 (appellate review accepts trial court’s factual/credibility findings)
Fuller v. State, 277 Ga. 505 (Strickland framework cited)
Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369 (vacatur of felony murder by operation of law)