Hampton v. State, 302 Ga. 166

In April 2013 Dennis Hampton shot and killed Takilam Terrell in a Cobb County bar; four witnesses who knew Hampton identified him as the shooter. Hampton was indicted on malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault counts, and weapons offenses; co-defendants were severed and testified for the State.
At trial Hampton was convicted on all counts except one aggravated-assault-with-a-bottle count; felony-murder convictions later vacated by operation of law; Hampton was sentenced to life without parole for malice murder and a concurrent term for a weapons offense.
During deliberations the jury asked whether it needed a unanimous vote on each charge; the court answered, “You must reach a verdict on each charge. And whatever your verdict is, it must be unanimous.”
Before trial Hampton’s counsel twice said he was not ready due to Hampton’s lack of cooperation and later moved for a continuance based on a newly disclosed potential witness; the trial court denied continuances and proceeded.
Hampton claimed on appeal: (1) the jury instruction was coercive, (2) the court abused discretion by denying a continuance, (3) trial counsel was ineffective for several reasons (including not calling two alibi witnesses and not objecting to the jury instruction), and (4) the court erred in sentencing him to life without parole.

Issue	Hampton's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Jury instruction coercive	Court’s statement that jury “must reach a verdict on each charge” coerced jurors and warrants reversal	Statement was not shown to have coerced verdicts; record does not show jury was deadlocked; evidence against Hampton strong	No reversible error under plain-error review; Hampton failed to show prejudice
Denial of continuance	Counsel wasn’t ready due to client non-cooperation and a newly disclosed witness; denial deprived Hampton of fair trial	Counsel had months to prepare; no specifics about witness evidence; court offered to assist; denial was within discretion	No abuse of discretion; denial proper given lack of detail and prejudice
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel failed to call two exculpatory witnesses and failed to object to jury instruction	Tactical choices (avoiding witness testimony inconsistent with defendant’s planned testimony) were reasonable; no prejudice shown from instruction issue	Claim denied: strategic choices not patently unreasonable; no showing of prejudice under Strickland
Mandatory life-without-parole sentence	Trial court misapplied statutes to require LWOP because of prior felony	Even if statutory interpretation error, sentence was harmless because court stated it would have imposed LWOP in any event given facts	Harmless error; judgment affirmed

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (bench-sufficiency standard for evidence reviewed in light most favorable to verdict)
Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (permissible jury charge language to avoid coercion of deadlocked juries)
Jenkins v. United States, 380 U.S. 445 (instruction compelling jury to decide was coercive reversible error)
Olano v. United States, 507 U.S. 725 (plain-error review allocation of burden of persuasion)
Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373 (uncertainty of error’s effect defeats plain-error prejudice showing)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance—deficient performance and prejudice)
Wiggins v. State, 295 Ga. 684 (noting heavy burden on ineffective assistance claims)
State v. Kelly, 290 Ga. 29 (Georgia’s four-step plain-error test)