Davis v. State
296 Ga. 126
| Ga. | 2014Background
- Davis was convicted by a Gwinnett County jury of murder and aggravated assault related to a 2010 shooting.
- Co-defendant Babbitt was tried separately and acquitted of the murder; Davis sought a new trial to admit Babbitt’s acquittal as evidence.
- Davis contends his attorney was ineffective for not requesting a more specific jury recharge on parties to a crime.
- The State argued Davis was charged as a party to the crime in various capacities, not exclusively as an accessory to Babbitt.
- The Supreme Court held the evidence was legally sufficient to convict Davis as a party to the crime and rejected the new-trial and ineffective-assistance arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Davis is entitled to a new trial to admit Babbitt’s acquittal. | Davis; cites White v. State to show acquittal of principal is relevant. | State; White is distinguishable and acquittal not essential to Davis’s guilt. | Not entitled; White distinguished; acquittal not essential to Davis’s guilt. |
| Whether White v. State controls this case to permit admission of acquittal evidence. | Davis relies on White’s framework for accessories. | State; this case differs because Davis was not charged as an accessory to a named principal. | White distinguished; not controlling; no new trial required. |
| Whether Davis received ineffective assistance for failure to recharge on parties to a crime. | Davis’s counsel should have recharged to aid conviction theory. | Counsel’s strategy reasonable; recharge would be improper and unnecessary. | No ineffective assistance; strategy reasonable; no prejudice shown. |
| Whether the jury’s question about conviction as a party if unarmed shows reversible error. | If unarmed, Davis could still be a party to the crime; recharge necessary. | Jury question does not necessitate rereading charges; written jury charge already provided. | No reversible error; evidence and instructions supported conviction as a party. |
Key Cases Cited
- White v. State, 257 Ga. 236 (Ga. 1987) (acquittal of principal may be relevant to accessory; distinguishable)
- Harrison v. State, 257 Ga. 528 (Ga. 1987) (distinguishes White in similar context)
- Brinson v. State, 261 Ga. 884 (Ga. 1992) (discusses party liability distinctions)
- Butler v. State, 273 Ga. 380 (Ga. 2001) (explains party liability principles)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for legal sufficiency of evidence)