Fisher v. State, 299 Ga. 478

Ronald Fisher was convicted of malice murder and related charges for the 2009 killing of Derrick Cullins based primarily on the testimony of David Lewis, who drove the parties to and from the scene and identified Fisher as the shooter.
Lewis admitted presence, driving the shooter and victim, and initially lied to police; no murder weapon or forensic link tied Fisher to the crime.
Trial counsel (Johnson) interviewed a potential defense witness, Jonathan Clark, who would have testified that Lewis was a drug dealer, had flashed a revolver days before the shooting, and was looking for the victim to collect a debt; Clark was listed as a defense witness but was not subpoenaed and did not testify.
Johnson also agreed to a jury instruction stating that testimony of a single witness, if believed, can establish a fact, but did not request the accomplice-corroboration instruction (former OCGA § 24-4-8) that would limit reliance on accomplice testimony.
The trial court convicted Fisher; on appeal the Georgia Supreme Court reviewed ineffective-assistance claims under Strickland and found counsel deficient for failing both to secure Clark’s attendance and to request the accomplice-corroboration instruction.
The Court concluded those combined errors created a reasonable probability of a different outcome, reversed Fisher’s convictions, and allowed the State to retry him because the evidence was legally sufficient.

Issue	Fisher's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to subpoena Clark	Johnson was professionally deficient for not subpoenaing Clark, who had exculpatory/impeaching testimony	State did not dispute deficiency as to Clark at evidentiary hearing	Court: counsel deficient for failing to secure Clark’s attendance
Whether counsel was ineffective for not requesting accomplice-corroboration instruction (former OCGA § 24-4-8)	Failure was an oversight; instruction was warranted because Lewis could be found an accomplice	State conceded error was not reasonable strategy; focused on prejudice	Court: counsel deficient for failing to request the instruction
Whether Fisher suffered Strickland prejudice from the combined deficiencies	Clark’s testimony would have impeached/accentuated argument that Lewis was an accomplice and possibly the shooter; jury lacked corroboration framework	State argued existing corroboration and vigorous cross-examination of Lewis made errors harmless	Court: Combined errors created a reasonable probability of a different result; prejudice shown; convictions reversed (state may retry)
Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support conviction despite reversal	Not contested by Fisher on appeal	State maintained sufficiency; jury could rationally convict based on Lewis and other evidence	Court: Evidence sufficient for conviction (Jackson standard), so retrial permitted

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test: deficient performance and prejudice)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for constitutional sufficiency of evidence)
Cowart v. State, 294 Ga. 333 (accomplice corroboration and retrial after reversal)
Crawford v. State, 294 Ga. 898 (accomplice corroboration must independently tend to show defendant’s participation)
Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809 (consideration of combined effect of counsel’s errors for prejudice)