Clark v. State
307 Ga. 537
| Ga. | 2019Background
- Shawn Clark (former police officer) shot and killed Antonio Ellison on November 14, 2015; Clark did not dispute firing but claimed self-defense and defense of his vehicle/habitation.
- Victim and girlfriend Kira McClure lived together; Clark had been dating McClure; Clark drove McClure to Ellison’s home the day of the shooting.
- Confrontation occurred at Clark’s SUV: Ellison approached, slapped Clark once and grappled with him at the driver’s door; witnesses described the struggle as brief and not seriously injurious.
- Clark retrieved a gun from the front seat, fired once into Ellison’s torso, then fired two more shots (one to the head) as Ellison fell; Clark drove off and ran over Ellison while leaving.
- Clark was indicted for malice murder, felony murder, and aggravated assault; convicted by a jury and sentenced to life for malice murder; appealed claiming insufficiency on defense-of-habitation and multiple ineffective-assistance claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Clark) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency: Did State disprove defense of habitation beyond reasonable doubt? | Clark: deadly force was justified under OCGA §16-3-23 (defense of habitation/self-defense of vehicle). | State: evidence showed only a single slap and a non-threatening struggle; deadly force was unreasonable. | Affirmed: jury could find deadly force unreasonable; defense of habitation disproven. |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to impeach Lindley with felonies | Clark: counsel should have used Lindley’s prior drug felonies to discredit him. | State: counsel cross-examined Lindley on bias/limited view; additional impeachment unlikely to change outcome. | Denied: no reasonable probability of a different result from added impeachment. |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to object to prosecutor’s comments on pre-arrest silence | Clark: prosecutor improperly commented on Clark not calling 911/turning himself in; counsel should have objected per Mallory. | State: Mallory was unsettled under the current Evidence Code at trial and later abrogated by Orr; counsel’s tactic in context was reasonable. | Denied: counsel not shown deficient or prejudicial given legal uncertainty and trial strategy. |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to object to misstatement of presumption of innocence | Clark: prosecutor told jurors presumption ‘‘goes away’’ as soon as they believe guilt (misstates law). | State: trial court correctly instructed jury on presumption and burden; jurors presumed to follow instructions. | Denied: counsel should have objected but no prejudice because jury received correct legal instructions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency-of-the-evidence review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance two-prong test)
- Fair v. State, 288 Ga. 244 (interpretation of OCGA § 16-3-23 and reasonable-belief requirement)
- State v. Orr, 305 Ga. 729 (post-Evidence Code treatment of pre-arrest silence and Mallory)
- Mallory v. State, 261 Ga. 625 (pre-Evidence Code rule barring comment on pre-arrest silence)
- Coleman v. State, 286 Ga. 291 (deadly-force reasoning under defense-of-habitation contexts)
- Mims v. State, 304 Ga. 851 (standards for reviewing sufficiency and counsel performance)
- Kemp v. State, 303 Ga. 385 (trier of fact may accept or reject portions of testimony)