Green v. State, 291 Ga. 287

Gree n was convicted after a jury trial of malice and felony murder of Candy Wright, with a merged aggravated assault charge and a separate rape/assault of Leanna Ziel; felony murder verdict was vacated by operation of law; judgments on remaining convictions imposed consecutive life sentences for murder and rape and 20 years for aggravated assault.
Wright died in early July 2007 in a filthy shed from manual strangulation with additional injuries; DNA from Wright was found on her genitals, and appellant admitted prior consensual sex with Wright.
Ziel was assaulted on September 24, 2007; she identified appellant, and DNA from Ziel’s vaginal/rectal areas matched appellant.
Evidence showed two episodes within months of each other, involving similar MO—strangulation and sexual activity in rough settings—supporting admissibility of related acts for joint trials.
Appellant argued insufficiency of evidence, severance denial, improper impeachment, suppression of statements, identification issues, and ineffective assistance; the court evaluated these under applicable standards.
Judgments affirmed despite several challenges to evidence, procedure, and trial conduct.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is the evidence sufficient to sustain the verdicts?	Green contends insufficient evidence post-admission of errors.	Prosecution's evidence should be considered in light of admissible record.	Yes; evidence viewed with all admissible materials supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Was denial of severance for joined offenses proper?	Offenses were not sufficiently similar to warrant joinder.	Two incidents shared MO, victims, setting; admissible as similar transaction.	Yes; court held no abuse of discretion in denial of severance.
May prosecution impeachment of Ziel with a prostitution conviction be admitted?	Evidence admissible to impeach Ziel’s credibility.	Prostitution conviction is not crimen falsi and violates rape shield.	Admissible only if falls under 24-9-84.1 or rape shield exception; here barred by rape shield statute.
Were appellant’s pre-trial statements properly suppressed?	Statements were involuntary and/or obtained in violation of right to counsel.	Statements voluntary; no custodial interrogation; Edwards/ Davis analysis favors admissibility.	Voluntary and admissible; no error in suppression ruling.
Did identification procedures at issue produce impermissibly suggestive identifications?	Lineups caused misidentifications due to resemblance in photos.	Photographs showed only minor variances; not impermissibly suggestive.	Identification procedures not impermissibly suggestive; admissible.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency of evidence standard)
Heard v. State, 287 Ga. 554 (2010) (similar-transaction evidence and severance discretion)
Davis v. State, 290 Ga. 757 (2012) (plain-error/review standard for trial errors)
Langlands v. State, 282 Ga. 103 (2007) (ineffective-assistance context and remand for new trial)
Murphy v. State, 267 Ga. 100 (1996) (preservation of burden of proof and instruction issues)