Carter v. State, 308 Ga. 589

Background

Victim Terrance Baker was shot in the head while sitting in the driver seat of his Jeep; a .40-caliber bullet exited his head and a .40-caliber shell casing was recovered from the vehicle.
Appellant Brandon Carter rode with Elijah Washington and Shawncy Barrett to buy marijuana from Baker; Carter gave investigators multiple, inconsistent accounts admitting variously that he possessed and/or gave the Smith & Wesson .40 used in the shooting.
Two .40 handguns (a Smith & Wesson and a Hi‑Point) were recovered from a dumpster near the apartment complex; ballistics matched the Smith & Wesson to the casing and bullet from the Jeep.
Carter’s 14‑year‑old sister Kenteria Brown testified that, the night before the shooting, Washington said “I gotta kill somebody tonight” and told her to fetch Carter and have him “bring that fire” (slang for a gun).
During deliberations the jury asked why gunshot residue (GSR) was not tested on Carter; the court, after a bench conference with counsel, told jurors to decide based on the evidence presented. The record is unclear whether Carter was present for the initial bench discussion.
Carter was convicted of malice murder and related firearm offenses; the trial court denied his new‑trial motion and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Carter)	Held
Admissibility of Washington’s statements to Brown under the co‑conspirator exception	Statements were admissions by a coconspirator and thus admissible under OCGA § 24‑8‑801(d)(2)(E)	Statements were only requests to form a conspiracy and not made "during the course and in furtherance" of one, so inadmissible hearsay	Court assumed (without deciding) admission was error but proceeded to harmless‑error analysis
Harmlessness of the challenged hearsay evidence	Any error was harmless because other strong, properly admitted evidence established Carter’s participation (his statements, fingerprint, possession/admission of the murder weapon, flight, recovered gun)	Admission was prejudicial and affected Carter’s substantial rights	Error, if any, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given compelling cumulative evidence; convictions stand
Right to be present for court’s initial handling of jury’s GSR question	No violation: the bench discussion was a legal matter; counsel for both sides were present and the jury was directed to the trial evidence	Carter’s absence during the initial discussion violated his constitutional right to be present at all proceedings against him	No violation: the right to be present does not extend to legal conferences about jury notes where defendant’s presence would be useless; answer was appropriate
Sufficiency of the evidence	Evidence (confessions, fingerprint, ballistic match, recovered gun, flight and conduct) sufficed to prove guilt as a party to the crime	Carter did not challenge sufficiency on appeal	Reviewing under Jackson v. Virginia, the Court found the evidence sufficient to support convictions

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Perez v. State, 303 Ga. 188 (2018) (nonconstitutional harmless‑error standard: whether it is highly probable the error did not contribute to the verdict)
Davis v. State, 302 Ga. 576 (2017) (admission of hearsay may be harmless when cumulative of other evidence)
Kirby v. State, 304 Ga. 472 (2018) (erroneously admitted evidence can be harmless when offset by compelling other evidence)
Leeks v. State, 296 Ga. 515 (2015) (defendant need not be present for legal conferences about jury notes that he could not meaningfully affect)
Heywood v. State, 292 Ga. 771 (2013) (scope of the right to be present; absence excused when presence would be useless)
Johnson v. State, 293 Ga. 641 (2013) (discussions of jury notes about legal matters may occur with defendant absent if counsel present)
Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369 (1993) (merger/vacatur principle referenced for felony‑murder counts)