Campbell v. State
314 Ga. App. 299
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Campbell and three companions conducted a four-day crime spree from Sept. 4–7, 2006 around Valdosta/Lowndes County targeting six victims.
- The group used three weapons, including Campbell's 9 mm handgun and a BB gun.
- Vehicles used were Campbell's Chrysler New Yorker and red Pontiac Grand Prix; security footage linked the vehicles to crimes and suspects wore matching clothing.
- Two Denson brothers pled guilty and testified; Jermaine Demps did not testify.
- Campbell was convicted of hijacking a motor vehicle (Counts 1), aggravated assault (Count 3), possession of a firearm during these crimes (Counts 2 and 4), armed robbery (Counts 5, 7, 9, 10), possession of a firearm during an armed robbery (Count 8), and attempted armed robbery (Count 6).
- Evidence included victim testimony, accomplice testimony, and corroborating physical objects (gun, clothing, money) linking Campbell to the crimes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for hijacking, aggravated assault, and firearm possession | Campbell contends the evidence fails to prove these elements. | State asserts sufficient evidence from victim, eyewitness, and corroborating items. | Evidence sufficient beyond reasonable doubt. |
| Sufficiency for armed robberies and attempted armed robbery | Campbell argues lack of direct identification and participation. | State shows party-to-crime and circumstantial evidence supports crimes. | Evidence sufficient to sustain all armed robbery and attempted armed robbery verdicts. |
| Whether Campbell was a party to the armed robberies | Presence alone is insufficient; Campbell argues no direct participation. | Court may infer participation from presence, lookout, and shared proceeds. | Evidence supports Campbell as a party to the armed robberies beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Accomplice corroboration requirement | Uncorroborated accomplice testimony cannot sustain conviction. | Slight corroboration suffices; extrinsic evidence need not be direct. | Corroboration was present; sufficient to connect Campbell to the crimes. |
Key Cases Cited
- Daniels v. State, 306 Ga.App. 577 (2010) (corroboration and substantial-step principles relevant to attempts and accomplice evidence)
- Rankin v. State, 278 Ga.704 (2004) (appellate review of sufficiency with circumstantial evidence and credibility)
- Lunz v. State, 174 Ga.App. 893 (1985) (circumstantial evidence sufficiency in armed robbery)
- Gordon v. State, 294 Ga.App. 908 (2008) (intent may be inferred from conduct and surrounding circumstances)
- Howie v. State, 201 Ga.App. 96 (1991) (participation liability for armed robbery where weapon used by accomplice)