Gray v. State
298 Ga. 885
Ga.2016Background
- Victim Marcus Jones, a downtown Atlanta drug dealer, was shot and killed near Garnett MARTA station on Feb. 22, 2006; Terrance Conyers fired the fatal shot.
- Carlisha Gray (co-defendant of Conyers) was accused of plotting the attack and offering payment to have Jones harmed.
- Gray and Conyers were jointly indicted on malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, firearm possession, and Gray alone on solicitation; Conyers pled guilty during trial.
- A jury convicted Gray of malice murder, firearm possession during commission of a crime, and solicitation; felony murder was vacated by operation of law and aggravated assault merged into malice murder.
- Gray appealed, arguing (1) the trial court should have excused a prospective juror for cause due to misunderstanding of the burden of proof, and (2) the trial court applied an incorrect standard to the general grounds of her motion for new trial.
- The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed, holding the evidence sufficient and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to strike the juror for cause; Gray forfeited review of the general‑grounds weight-of-the-evidence claim by not raising it at the new‑trial hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Gray's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a prospective juror should have been excused for cause for misunderstanding burden of proof | Juror indicated he would expect defendant to present evidence and might convict if she did not; Gray contends this shows fixed bias requiring excusal | Juror initially confused but, after explanation, said he could listen to all evidence and was impartial; trial court properly rehabilitated him | Trial court acted within discretion; juror’s confusion cured by explanation and no manifest abuse of discretion in refusing to strike for cause |
| Whether the trial court erred in failing to address the general grounds (weight of the evidence) in Gray’s motion for new trial | Gray asserted verdict was against the weight of the evidence and contrary to justice in her original motion; she argues the court failed to exercise discretion under OCGA §§ 5-5-20/21 | At the new‑trial hearing Gray limited her argument to insufficiency of the evidence and never argued the general grounds; thus she forfeited review of the weight‑of‑the‑evidence claim | Gray forfeited the complaint because she did not press the general‑grounds claim at the new‑trial hearing; no remand required |
| Whether evidence was legally sufficient to support convictions | Gray argued no one saw her with a gun or personally shoot Jones; evidence showed only intent to have Jones beaten, not killed | State argued Gray plotted, offered payment to harm Jones, and approached with Conyers who shot Jones—supporting party liability | Evidence sufficient for convictions beyond a reasonable doubt, including liability as a party to the crime |
| Harmlessness of any error concerning felony murder sentencing terminology | Gray argues the trial court erred by saying it "merged" felony murder into malice murder rather than vacating it | State points out felony murder was vacated by operation of law; wording did not harm Gray | Any erroneous wording was harmless because felony murder was vacated by operation of law |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes legal-sufficiency standard for convictions)
- Powell v. State, 291 Ga. 743 (2012) (party liability for crimes explained)
- Brockman v. State, 292 Ga. 707 (2013) (standard for excusing a prospective juror for cause)
- Brown v. State, 295 Ga. 804 (2014) (deference to trial court’s demeanor and credibility findings in voir dire)
- Thorpe v. State, 285 Ga. 604 (2009) (voir dire evaluated as a whole; confusion about burden can be cured)
- Allen v. State, 296 Ga. 738 (2015) (distinguishing sufficiency claims from general‑grounds weight‑of‑evidence claims at new‑trial hearing)
- Slaton v. State, 296 Ga. 122 (2014) (failure to argue general grounds at hearing forfeits remand)
- Nwakanma v. State, 296 Ga. 493 (2015) (defendant not harmed if peremptory strike not lost)
- Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369 (1993) (merger principles and vacatur of overlapping charges)