Durden v. State
293 Ga. 89
| Ga. | 2013Background
- Appellant Shinderen Durden convicted of malice murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, tampering with evidence, and two counts of child cruelty arising from the November 9, 2008 shooting death of Shannon King.
- King died from a gunshot to the left side of the head; medical examiner deemed homicide and noted the wound was not a self-inflicted contact wound.
- Two young children witnessed significant domestic-violence events and the shooting; Appellant initially told police King shot herself and later provided more details.
- Appellant and King had lived together while he renovated the home; there had been prior domestic-violence incidents including threats with a gun.
- Evidence included a .380 pistol found in the woods, gunshot residue on Appellant’s hands, and statements to hospital and police; Alexis testified about witnessing the events.
- Trial court sentenced: life for malice murder, 20 years for aggravated assault, 10 years for tampering with evidence, 12 months for each cruelty count; felony murder vacated on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether aggravated assault is an element or sentencing factor and whether it merges with malice murder. | Durden argues Hall overruled and that aggravated assault has an element different from murder. | State contends aggravating factors may yield separate sentences. | Aggravated assault is a sentencing factor, not an element; aggregate convictions merged; aggravated-assault sentence vacated. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to support all convictions. | Durden asserts insufficiency to convict on multiple counts. | State contends evidence suffices. | Evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdict supported all convictions beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Whether the statements to police and the murder weapon were admissible under Miranda. | Durden contends custodial interrogation without warnings violated Miranda. | State asserts he was not in custody and volunteered information. | Statements admissible; Durden was not in custody and volunteered information; interrogation proper. |
| Whether the prosecutor’s closing argument improperly prejudiced Durden. | Argument suggesting fugitive behavior overstepped evidentiary bounds. | Argument permissible inference within closing latitude. | Closing argument crossed line minimally but did not alter verdict; not reversible error. |
| Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance related to suppression and closing-argument objections. | Counsel failed to suppress gunshot-residue evidence and failed to object to improper comments. | Unclear impact; claims lack merit given other evidence. | Merits failed; suppression would have been futile; improper comments not prejudicial given overwhelming evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review requires rational juror to find guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
- Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (Ga. 2009) (credibility and conflicts for jury to resolve are for the jury to decide)
- Roebuck v. State, 277 Ga. 200 (Ga. 2003) (name concordance evidence can support identity where no contrary evidence exists)
- Hall v. State, 287 Ga. 755 (Ga. 2010) (overruled: living-in-house factor is sentencing, not element)
- O’Brien v. United States, 560 U.S. 218 (U.S. 2010) (discusses whether a fact is an element or a sentencing factor for Apprendi considerations)