Collins v. State, 308 Ga. 608

Background

On March 2, 2011, Keith Jacobs was shot and killed after a confrontation with Renita Collins; Michael Stallworth was present and tried jointly with Collins.
Witnesses testified Collins argued with Jacobs, left and returned with Stallworth, and shots were fired; several witnesses placed Collins or someone matching her description at the scene with a gun and identified defendants in photographic lineups.
Collins and Stallworth were indicted on multiple counts including malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony; a jury convicted Collins and the trial court sentenced her to life plus five years.
Collins filed and amended motions for new trial; the trial court denied relief and later granted an out-of-time appeal, after which Collins appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court.
On appeal Collins argued (1) juror misconduct based on post-verdict juror questions about Stallworth’s failure to testify, and that the court erred in refusing to subpoena jurors; and (2) the court abused its discretion by failing to strike a prospective juror (Juror 18) for cause.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Collins)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Juror misconduct based on jurors asking defense counsel why Stallworth did not testify	Jurors’ post-trial questions show they drew adverse inferences from defendants’ failure to testify, creating a presumption of prejudice against Collins	Jurors’ questions were internal deliberations or curiosity; no admissible evidence shows juror misconduct	Court held juror statements about deliberations are barred by Rule 606(b); no admissible evidence of misconduct, claim fails
Right to subpoena jurors to prove misconduct	Trial court abused discretion by denying subpoenas that would show jurors considered defendants’ silence improperly	Juror testimony about deliberations is inadmissible under Rule 606(b); subpoenas would seek barred testimony	Court held subpoenas/admissibility properly denied because juror testimony about internal deliberations is excluded under Rule 606(b)
Excusal of Juror 18 for cause	Juror 18 expressed doubts and said indictment and conservative leanings might bias him; Collins argued he should be excused	Trial court could assess demeanor and found juror could decide based on evidence and instructions	Court affirmed: trial court did not manifestly abuse discretion in denying cause strike for Juror 18

Key Cases Cited

Stallworth v. State, 304 Ga. 333 (2018) (related co-defendant conviction and factual background)
Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369 (1993) (merger/vacatur of felony-murder counts by operation of law)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107 (1987) (common-law prohibition on juror testimony to impeach verdict)
Beck v. State, 305 Ga. 383 (2019) (Georgia’s adoption and application of Rule 606(b) principles)
United States v. Brown, 934 F.3d 1278 (11th Cir. 2019) (discussion of Rule 606(b) and its near-categorical bar on juror testimony)
United States v. Foster, 878 F.3d 1297 (11th Cir. 2018) (Rule 606(b) imposes a nearly categorical bar; external vs. internal distinction)
United States v. Friedland, 660 F.2d 919 (3d Cir. 1981) (post-trial discussion of defendant’s failure to testify is internal and not admissible)
United States v. Martinez-Moncivais, 14 F.3d 1030 (5th Cir. 1994) (jurors’ statements about a defendant not testifying fall within Rule 606(b) prohibition)
United States v. Kelley, 461 F.3d 817 (6th Cir. 2006) (failure to testify is part of the trial record, not extraneous information)
United States v. Tran, 122 F.3d 670 (8th Cir. 1997) (jurors learning of defendant’s silence from trial does not make it extraneous)
United States v. Rutherford, 371 F.3d 634 (9th Cir. 2004) (juror testimony about discussion of failure to testify is inadmissible absent extraneous influence)
United States v. Voigt, 877 F.2d 1465 (10th Cir. 1989) (juror statement attributing verdict to defendant’s silence is internal and barred)
Poole v. State, 291 Ga. 848 (2012) (standard: striking juror for cause is within trial court’s discretion)
Brockman v. State, 292 Ga. 707 (2013) (prospective juror’s equivocation and demeanor are for the trial court; doubt alone does not mandate excusal)