Capps v. State, 300 Ga. 6

Background

On July 10, 2005 William Kenneth Capps shot and killed Ernest Morocco “Rocco” Lattimore after a drug buy; eyewitness and physical evidence tied Capps and his .38 revolver to the killing.
Capps was indicted for malice murder and related charges; tried October 2006, convicted of malice murder and sentenced to life.
At trial, eyewitness McMillan testified that Capps had repeatedly spoken about "killing a black man" and recounted family violence against African-Americans; a detective testified Capps made a racially pejorative remark about an African-American detective.
Defense did not object contemporaneously to the testimony characterizing Capps’s racist statements and later sought a mistrial; trial court admitted the evidence as relevant to motive.
Post-conviction, Capps argued multiple ineffective-assistance claims (failure to object to testimony and closing argument, incomplete expert cross-examination, and counsel’s acquiescence to juror removal) and that the court abused discretion by limiting inquiry into an alleged nonverbal deputy gesture (a reported "noose-tying").
The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed: evidence was sufficient; challenged evidence was admissible as motive; counsel’s omissions were not deficient or prejudicial; juror removal and the court’s handling of the nonverbal-communication allegation were proper.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Capps)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Admission of testimony recounting Capps’s statements about family killings of African‑Americans (similar‑transaction/character evidence)	Testimony improperly introduced evidence of a prior unrelated murder / impermissible character evidence	Evidence was relevant to motive and not offered as proof of a prior crime; admissible even if it incidentally implicates character	Evidence admissible as motive; counsel not ineffective for failing to make a meritless objection
Admission of defendant’s racist remarks to detective (character evidence)	Remarks were improper character evidence and prejudicial	Remarks were relevant to motive and directly probative of racial animus toward the victim	Remarks admissible as motive evidence; counsel not ineffective for not objecting
Prosecutor’s closing argument referencing racist statements	Closing improperly referenced inadmissible similar‑transaction/character evidence	Argument based on properly admitted evidence and within permissible latitude	No ineffective assistance for failure to object; closing was proper
Failure to further cross‑examine medical/firearms experts about copper fragments vs. lead bullet	Counsel should have exposed inconsistency undermining forensic identification	No real inconsistency: small metal flakes were separate from the lead projectile and likely necklace fragments; no benefit to defense	No prejudice; counsel’s cross‑examination adequate; not ineffective
Acquiescence to removal of Juror No. 3 after Batson inquiry and later dismissal	Trial court lacked legally relevant basis to dismiss juror; counsel’s waiver deprived Capps of chosen jury and was prejudicial	Trial court had discretion and a sound basis; defense initially sought to strike that juror; counsel’s conduct was tactical and not shown deficient	Court’s removal was permissible under OCGA § 15‑12‑172; counsel not shown deficient or prejudicial
Denial of expanded inquiry into alleged nonverbal deputy misconduct ("tying a noose")	Court prevented full inquiry into possible improper nonverbal communication to jurors	Court inquired, deputy denied conduct; defense declined further development and accepted record notation	No abuse of discretion: trial court’s alternative relief complied with defense request and record showed the matter was addressed

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
Hendrix v. State, 298 Ga. 60 (deference to tactical trial decisions in ineffectiveness claims)
Lindsey v. State, 282 Ga. 447 (motive evidence admissible even if it incidentally places character in issue)
Fulton v. State, 278 Ga. 58 (same)
Goodman v. State, 293 Ga. 80 (racial animus admissible as motive)
Porter v. State, 292 Ga. 292 (failure to make meritless objection not ineffective assistance)
Boring v. State, 289 Ga. 429 (beliefs/ideologies admissible when relevant to motive)
Mohamud v. State, 297 Ga. 532 (no hindsight in assessing counsel performance)
Robinson v. State, 299 Ga. 648 (speculation cannot support ineffectiveness)
Brooks v. State, 281 Ga. 14 (trial court discretion in juror replacement; tactical choices)
Lyon v. State, 262 Ga. 247 (court’s handling of juror‑communication allegations)
Smith v. State, 294 Ga. App. 692 (same)
Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (Batson analysis extended to defendant peremptory challenges)
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (peremptory‑strike discrimination standard)
Lockhart v. State, 298 Ga. 384 (juror selection as trial tactic)