Dupree v. State
303 Ga. 885
| Ga. | 2018Background
- Between Nov. 9–10, 2014, 75-year-old Florene Duke was beaten, bound, gagged, moved to her bedroom, covered with a comforter, and asphyxiated; her body was found Nov. 10.
- Police linked Dupree to the scene by: his hairs on the victim, his DNA on blood from a tank top twisted around the victim’s thumb, Dupree’s fingerprints on stolen TVs recovered, and phone records/phone calls tying him to the victim’s address.
- Witness Detrone Royal testified he accompanied Dupree to remove two TVs and that Dupree used the victim’s phone to summon him; Royal said he did not see the victim in the residence.
- Dupree first gave inconsistent statements naming two other suspects (one incarcerated), asserting someone else committed the murder; those leads were unsubstantiated.
- Indictment charged malice murder, two counts of felony murder (later vacated), kidnapping, robbery from a person over 65, and burglary; jury convicted on all counts and Dupree received life without parole plus consecutive 20-year terms; trial court denied his motion for new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Dupree's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict | Evidence pointed to another perpetrator; directed verdict of acquittal warranted | Physical and testimonial evidence tied Dupree to the assault, theft, and scene | Court: Evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia; convictions affirmed |
| Jury charge on robbery (owner consciousness) | Requested instruction that owner’s consciousness before completion is essential | Not applicable to robbery by force or where victim is killed; consciousness not required | Court: No plain error; instruction not required where defendant killed victim first |
| Lesser-included instruction (theft by taking for burglary) | Trial court should have instructed on theft by taking due to lack of forced entry evidence | Burglary requires entry/remain without authority with intent to commit theft; forced entry not required; evidence supported burglary | Court: No plain error; even if omission was error, it did not affect substantial rights |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Multiple claims (failure to investigate alternate suspect, expert, venue, jury strike, plea communication, etc.) | Counsel’s choices were reasonable; Dupree failed Strickland prongs | Court: Claims lack merit; Dupree did not show deficient performance or prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Lee v. State, 270 Ga. 798 (killing victim first does not preclude robbery conviction)
- Stansell v. State, 270 Ga. 147 (Jackson standard applies on directed verdict/new trial challenges)
- Newton v. State, 294 Ga. 767 (consent by artifice still supports burglary conviction)
- Kelly v. State, 290 Ga. 29 (plain-error test for jury instructions requires effect on substantial rights)
- Redding v. State, 296 Ga. 471 (lesser-included instruction harmless where evidence strongly supports charged offense)
- Howell v. State, 330 Ga. App. 668 (same principle on lesser-included instructions)