Dulcio v. State, 292 Ga. 645

Background

Dulció and Morrison were tried jointly for malice murder, felony murder, and related offenses arising from Keith Brown's death; Rutledge had orchestrated the plan and remained at the vehicle.
Dulció joined the plan with a .380 handgun; Morrison drove the group to Brown’s apartment and aided in the robbery scheme.
Dulció fired into Brown's apartment; Brown was found dead from multiple gunshot wounds consistent with a .380; DNA and cell records linked the involved parties to Brown.
Witnesses testified to Dulció’s statements admitting involvement; a white latex glove found in the parking lot bore Dulció’s DNA.
Shinault testified that Rutledge blamed Morrison, raising Bruton-related evidence considerations; the trial court instructed jurors to disregard certain testimony.
The cases against Dulció and Morrison were consolidated for trial; severance issues arose but were decided in the context of the joined trial.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the evidence sufficient to convict?	Dulcio argues evidence was hearsay/circumstantial and insufficient.	Dulcio contends insufficient evidence excludes reasonable hypotheses other than guilt.	Yes; evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdicts supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Did admission of Shinault testimony violate Bruton or constitute inadmissible hearsay?	Morrison argues co-conspirator statements were hearsay and Bruton-violative.	Prosecution contends statements were admissible co-conspirator or res gestae evidence, non-testimonial.	No reversible error; statements admitted under co-conspirator exceptions and not Bruton-violative.
Did trial counsel's performance render ineffective assistance for Dulció?	Dulcio alleges multiple deficiencies (experience, strategy, and objections).	Dulcio asserts counsel failed in various respects, prejudicing outcome.	No; claims fail under Strickland and related standards; performance was reasonable.
Did trial counsel's performance render ineffective assistance for Morrison on plea offer and related matters?	Morrison argues she was misinformed/failed to receive plea offer details impacting decision.	Morrison contends counsel misrepresented or failed to inform about plea and its consequences.	No; record shows offer was conveyed and counsel advised; no reasonable likelihood of different outcome.
Was severance properly denied or required for Morrison?	Joint trial risked spillover prejudice due to Dulció's stronger case.	Morrison claims prejudice from consolidated trial and stronger co-defendant's evidence.	No reversible error; severance would not have been warranted given lack of demonstrated prejudice.

Key Cases Cited

Nichols v. State, 292 Ga. 290 (Ga. 2013) (sufficiency standard for evidence on appeal)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review; rational juror could have found guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (U.S. 1968) (co-defendant confessions against non-testifying codefendants)
Moss v. State, 275 Ga. 96 (Ga. 2002) (Bruton limitations not violated when evidence does not incriminate on its face)
Colton v. State, 292 Ga. 509 (Ga. 2013) (res gestae considerations and admissibility)
Zackery v. State, 286 Ga. 399 (Ga. 2010) (co-conspirator statements and Bruton considerations)
Dyer v. State, 287 Ga. 137 (Ga. 2010) (co-conspirator and res gestae exceptions to hearsay)
Turpin v. Curtis, 278 Ga. 698 (Ga. 2004) (constructive denial of counsel standards)
United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1984) (presumption of ineffective assistance requires total denial of counsel)
Sanford v. State, 287 Ga. 351 (Ga. 2010) (standard for evaluating ineffective assistance claims)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance)
Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (U.S. 2012) (need to inform defendant of plea offers)
Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376 (U.S. 2012) (advising on plea decisions and consequences)