Fennell v. State
292 Ga. 834
| Ga. | 2013Background
- Appellant Marcus Fennell was convicted of two counts of malice murder, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in connection with the killings of Coleman and Washington.
- Appellant helped set up a drug purchase and was part of the plan to kill Coleman to avoid retaliation.
- The group shot Coleman and Washington; money and drugs were taken; Coleman’s phone last called appellant.
- Police traced Coleman’s phone, learned last call was to appellant, and brought him to the station.
- Pre-Miranda statements were given during an initial interview in an unlocked room; Miranda warnings followed, after which he gave additional statements.
- The State relied on these statements for convictions; trial court denied motions to suppress and for new trial; appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Fennell contends insufficient evidence supports guilt | Fennell argues alternate explanations negate intent | Evidence sufficient to support guilt beyond reasonable doubt |
| Pre-Miranda custody | State contends no custody; statements admissible | Fennell claims custody existed, triggering Miranda | Not in custody; admissible pre-Miranda statements under totality of circumstances |
| Post-Miranda interrogation technique | Seibert/Pye two-stage technique used | Technique not employed; proper questioning | No improper two-stage questioning; post-warning questions admissible |
| Ineffective assistance—juror strike rationale | Counsel failed to provide race-neutral justification for juror strike | No proven prejudice; pretext alone insufficient | No ineffective assistance; outcome not demonstrated to be different |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency proper standard for convicting based on evidence)
- Vergara v. State, 283 Ga. 175 (Ga. 2008) (admissibility decisions under totality of the circumstances)
- Petty v. State, 283 Ga. 268 (Ga. 2008) (not in custody for Miranda under described facts)
- Sosniak v. State, 287 Ga. 279 (Ga. 2010) (not in custody where similar circumstances)
- Bell v. State, 280 Ga. 562 (Ga. 2006) (not in custody where free to leave yet under supervision)
- State v. Folsom, 286 Ga. 105 (Ga. 2009) (two-stage interrogation not employed; proper limits on questions)
- Gober v. State, 264 Ga. 226 (Ga. 1994) (voluntariness of statements; coercive tactics absent)