BROXTON v. THE STATE (Two Cases), 306 Ga. 127

Background

In July 2015, multiple shootings in DeKalb County resulted in deaths (Chadmon on July 3; Campbell and Nelson on July 30) and several aggravated assaults; defendants Joseph Broxton and Daniel Pena (members/associates of the Gangster Disciples/Hate Committee) were indicted and tried with co-defendants.
State evidence included eyewitness testimony tying Broxton and Pena to the shootings, cellphone location data, Ficklin and Hurt’s testimony about driving and shooting incidents, gang expert testimony establishing gang membership and the Hate Committee’s enforcement role, and ballistics linking firearms to scenes.
Jury convicted Broxton of multiple counts including three malice murders, aggravated assaults, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery, and Street Gang Act violations; sentenced to consecutive life terms plus additional years.
Jury convicted Pena of multiple counts including two malice murders, aggravated assaults, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery, and Street Gang Act violations; sentenced to consecutive life terms plus additional years.
Post-trial motions for new trial were denied; appeals raised (1) Broxton: ineffective assistance for stipulating gang elements and alleged error in sending a co-indictee’s written statement to the jury; (2) Pena: insufficiency of evidence as to Nelson/Turner shootings and ineffective assistance for failure to seek pretrial immunity and failure to move to sever.

Issues

Issue	Broxton's Argument	Pena's Argument	Held
1. Whether counsel was ineffective for stipulating that Street Gang Act elements were met	Counsel deficient for conceding gang/nexus elements, prejudicing Broxton	Stipulation was strategic; jury still had to find predicate acts beyond reasonable doubt	Not ineffective; strategy reasonable and not prejudicial; conviction affirmed
2. Whether allowing a co-indictee’s written statement to go to jury violated continuing-witness rule	Trial court erred by permitting Ficklin’s written statement to be reviewed during deliberations	Record shows statement was not sent out; prosecutor read statement in open court with defense agreement	No error shown; claim fails
3. Whether evidence was insufficient to convict Pena for Nelson (malice) and Turner (aggravated assault) and related gang counts	Pena argued no proof he shot, exited car, or drove BMW; moved for directed verdict	State argued Pena was a party to crimes via joint criminal enterprise, presence, conduct, and prior coordinated shootings	Evidence sufficient to convict Pena as a party to those offenses and related Street Gang Act violations; directed verdict properly denied
4. Whether Pena’s counsel was ineffective for (a) not filing pretrial immunity motion and (b) not moving to sever trials	(a) Counsel should have sought immunity based on asserted self-defense; (b) Counsel should have sought severance because co-defendant testimony prejudiced Pena	Counsel’s choices were plausible strategic decisions; no showing that severance was necessary or that no competent counsel would have done likewise	No ineffective assistance shown on either ground; convictions affirmed

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test)
Romer v. State, 293 Ga. 339 (performance standard for counsel)
Matthews v. State, 301 Ga. 286 (review of ineffective assistance claims)
Pruitt v. State, 282 Ga. 30 (strategic stipulations and counsel performance)
Satterfield v. State, 256 Ga. 593 (severance factors and discretion)
Lupoe v. State, 300 Ga. 233 (need for clear showing of prejudice to obtain severance)