Hassel v. State
294 Ga. 834
| Ga. | 2014Background
- Hassel convicted of felony murder and related counts for the November 18, 2006 shooting death of Lumpkin at a Moreland Avenue residence in Athens.
- The residence housed owners Hemphill and Echols, family, friends, and visitors; drugs were transacted in the driveway and nearby.
- Hassel, a felon who dated Hemphill’s sister, had previously lived at the house and was a frequent visitor.
- Witnesses placed Hassel and Shepard at or near the residence leading up to and after the shooting, with attempts to lure Lumpkin outside and flight from the scene observed.
- Forensic evidence tied a handgun found behind Hankton’s home to shell casings and projectiles from Lumpkin’s body; Hassel’s letters and statements implicated his involvement.
- The trial court admitted co-conspirator statements as former declarant under OCGA 24-3-5; Hassel challenged the sufficiency of evidence, effectiveness of counsel, and hearsay rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Hassel argues insufficient evidence to convict as a party to the crimes | State contends sufficient circumstantial and direct evidence supports a conspiracy/abetment | Sufficient evidence to support conviction as a party to the crimes |
| Effective assistance of counsel | Counsel failed to interview key witnesses Shepard and White | Investigation was reasonable; witnesses unavailable or unhelpful | No deficient performance or prejudice; claims fail under Strickland |
| Admissibility of co-conspirator statements | Statements to Hankton were testimonial and/or improperly admitted | Statements fall under former OCGA 24-3-5 co-conspirator exception and are non-testimonial | Admissible under former co-conspirator exception; no Crawford violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency standard for criminal evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (deficient performance and prejudice standard for ineffective assistance)
- Romero v. State, 293 Ga. 339 (Ga. 2013) (requires considering performance under Strickland with strong presumption of reasonableness)
- Green v. State, 291 Ga. 579 (Ga. 2012) (ineffectiveness review; tactical decisions protected by deference)
- Allen v. State, 288 Ga. 263 (Ga. 2010) (co-conspirator statements and hearsay exception)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (confrontation clause; non-testimonial statements considerations)
- Griffin v. State, 294 Ga. 325 (Ga. 2013) (existence of conspiracy evidence standards)
- Gibbons v. State, 248 Ga. 858 (Ga. 1982) (use of prior inconsistent statements; substantive evidence)
- Young v. State, 291 Ga. 627 (Ga. 2012) (conspiracy/co-conspiracy statement considerations)