Funes v. State, 289 Ga. 793

Appellant Alex Funes was convicted of malice murder and related offenses arising from a pool hall fight in Clayton County where a rival gang member was killed by a .380 pistol shot.
Witnesses described a shooter identifiable by a white tank top and distinctive chest/neck/shoulder tattoos; shell casings from the scene were all from the same gun.
A police officer who knew Funes identified him as a possible gunman; an eyewitness later identified Funes in a photo lineup.
Funes waived Miranda rights and admitted firing three shots, claiming self-defense; at trial, witnesses described the shooter by appearance and Funes testified he acted out of fear.
The jury was instructed on justification, including self-defense and mutual combat; the trial court admitted post-arrest statements and limited cross-examination in some respects.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Funes argues the evidence fails to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.	State contends eyewitness IDs and ballistics are sufficient to sustain verdict.	Evidence, viewed most favorably to verdict, suffices for rational jury to convict.
Voluntary manslaughter instruction	There was provocation evidence supporting voluntary manslaughter.	Provocation shown does not meet standard; fear alone is not heat of passion.	No basis to instruct on voluntary manslaughter; provocation requires more than fear or pre-fight combat.
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel (eyewitness identifications)	Counsel should have suppressed identifications as improperly reliable.	Identification credibility is a jury issue; suppression not warranted absent police misconduct.	Counsel not ineffective; no basis to suppress identifications or prior issues.
Ineffective assistance re: cross-examination of ballistics expert	Counsel was unprepared to cross-examine ballistics expert due to notification issue.	Counsel prepared and cross-examined adequately; strategy-based assessment.	No deficient performance; cross-examination strategy within reasonable professional conduct.
Admission of post-arrest statement	Statement should be excluded due to Miranda/voluntariness issues and death-penalty pressure.	Miranda waiver valid; mentioning death penalty does not render statement involuntary.	Miranda warnings adequate; death-penalty mention is not involuntary.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1979) (sufficiency review: rational jury could convict)
Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (Ga. 2009) (jury credibility resolves witness conflicts)
Hicks v. State, 287 Ga. 260 (Ga. 2010) (fear alone not provocation for voluntary manslaughter)
White v. State, 287 Ga. 208 (Ga. 2010) (provocation requirements for voluntary manslaughter ambiguous)
Nichols v. State, 275 Ga. 246 (Ga. 2002) (provocation limitations for voluntary manslaughter)
Sharp v. State, 286 Ga. 799 (Ga. 2010) (in-court identification depends on underlying admissibility)
Sosniak v. State, 287 Ga. 279 (Ga. 2010) (death-penalty framing does not render statement involuntary)
Preston v. State, 282 Ga. 210 (Ga. 2007) (explanation of seriousness of situation not equivalent to coercion)
Dockery v. State, 287 Ga. 275 (Ga. 2010) (review of counsel's preparation and decision-making)
Harvey v. State, 284 Ga. 8 (Ga. 2008) (no automatic duty for hours of consultation; strategic cross-examination)
Lyons v. State, 247 Ga. 465 (Ga. 1981) (identification procedure due process considerations)