Coleman v. State
301 Ga. 720
| Ga. | 2017Background
- Victim Bobby Tillman was beaten to death after an overcrowded house party; autopsy showed a blunt impact laceration to the heart.
- Horace Coleman and Quantez Mallory were identified by eyewitnesses and photographic lineups and convicted of malice murder; both sentenced to life without parole.
- At trial a jailhouse informant testified he was threatened because he implicated Coleman; the trial court sustained a hearsay objection and gave a curative instruction but denied a mistrial.
- During jury selection the prosecutor used peremptory strikes against six Black veniremembers; Mallory raised a Batson challenge and argued the trial court failed to make an express step-three finding.
- Mallory also argued he was denied due process because he lacked access to GCIC criminal-history records of prospective jurors; he did not request those records under OCGA § 35-3-34.
- The trial judge questioned the State’s forensic pathologist at length about manner/position of impact; defendants argued this was an improper judicial comment on the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of mistrial was error after jailhouse informant’s hearsay threats (Coleman) | Coleman: informant’s testimony was inadmissible and prejudicial, requiring mistrial | State: court promptly sustained objection, rebuked prosecutor, and gave curative instruction; denial was within discretion | Denial affirmed: curative instruction and rebuke mitigated harm; no abuse of discretion (McKibbins standard) |
| Whether trial court erred by failing to make an express Batson step-three finding (Mallory) | Mallory: court failed to expressly decide whether strikes were purposefully discriminatory | State: prosecutor gave race-neutral reasons and court evaluated demeanor and totality; implicit step-three analysis occurred | Denial affirmed: record shows court considered credibility and circumstances and found no discriminatory intent |
| Whether Mallory’s due process rights were violated by lack of access to GCIC juror records | Mallory: inability to obtain GCIC records impeded exercise of strikes and harmed Batson challenge | State: Mallory never requested records under statutory procedure, did not preserve constitutional challenge, and there is no general right to discover State’s jury-selection info | Denial affirmed: Mallory failed to seek statutory remedy or preserve the issue; no due process violation shown |
| Whether judge’s extensive questioning of pathologist amounted to improper comment on evidence (both) | Defendants: court’s questioning intimated opinion on evidence and guilt | State: questions were neutral, aimed to clarify manner/cause of death (not identity), and within judge’s discretion | Affirmed: questioning was objective, did not express opinion on guilt, and concerned manner/cause of death not in dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for legal sufficiency of evidence)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (prohibits race-based peremptory strikes; three-step framework)
- McKibbins v. State, 293 Ga. 843 (standard for mistrial discretion)
- Toomer v. State, 292 Ga. 49 (Batson step-two explanation sufficiency)
- Heard v. State, 295 Ga. 559 (trial court’s role in evaluating Batson step-three)
- Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (burden of persuasion remains with opponent of strike)
- United States v. Edouard, 485 F.3d 1324 (upholding denial where trial court condensed Batson steps)
- Williams v. State, 271 Ga. 323 (no entitlement to discover State’s jury-selection investigatory info)
- Bello v. State, 300 Ga. 682 (no general constitutional right to discovery; Brady limited to favorable material)
- Curry v. State, 283 Ga. 99 (permissible scope of trial judge questioning of witnesses)