Hickman v. State, 299 Ga. 267

Victim was assaulted in an abandoned house on Jan. 5, 2010; two classmates, Marshae Hickman (appellant) and Jermaine Robinson, were involved; victim escaped and later identified them in a diary entry.
Victim disappeared Apr. 28, 2010; her remains were found in Nov. 2010 behind a dumpster in the apartment complex where Hickman lived.
Hickman was indicted (July 11, 2012) on separate indictments for attempted rape (and related offenses) and for murder (malice murder, felony murder, etc.); trial began Apr. 8, 2013; jury convicted on virtually all counts and Hickman was sentenced to life without parole for malice murder plus additional terms.
During post-arrest interviews in Oct. 2011, Hickman made incriminating custodial statements; he contested voluntariness at a Jackson-Denno hearing where an expert testified about his understanding of Miranda rights.
The trial court admitted (1) Hickman’s custodial statements after finding waiver knowing and voluntary, (2) victim’s diary under the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing doctrine, and (3) tried the two indictments jointly; Hickman appealed raising severance, admissibility, jury instruction, and voluntariness issues.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Joinder/severance of two indictments (offenses months apart)	Joinder was improper because offenses were separate in time/place and could prejudice Hickman	Offenses were not joined solely because they were similar; trial court reasonably concluded jury could distinguish evidence	Denied; no abuse of discretion in denying severance; joinder permissible under Stewart analysis
Voluntariness of custodial statements	Statements inadmissible because Hickman did not knowingly/voluntarily waive Miranda due to confusion and recent contact with public defender (expert testimony)	Hickman was read rights, initialed and signed form, asked no questions; waiver found knowing and voluntary	Denied; trial court’s credibility/findings upheld and statements admitted
Admission of victim’s diary under forfeiture by wrongdoing	Diary was hearsay and should be excluded; OCGA §24-8-807 argued as limiting	Diary admissible under forfeiture-by-wrongdoing (defendant caused witness unavailability); §24-8-807 inapplicable because another exception controls	Denied; diary admitted after preponderance showing that defendant caused victim’s unavailability
Jury instruction on battery vs. involuntary manslaughter	Jury instructions conflated battery and involuntary manslaughter definitions and could confuse jury	Issue moot because battery and involuntary manslaughter convictions merged/vacated by operation of law	Moot; no reversible error

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes sufficiency-of-the-evidence standard in criminal cases)
Dingler v. State, 233 Ga. 462 (right to severance when offenses joined solely by similarity)
Stewart v. State, 277 Ga. 138 (adopted framework for analyzing severance when not joined solely by similarity)
Currier v. State, 294 Ga. 392 (burden on State to prove voluntariness of confession by preponderance)
Wright v. State, 285 Ga. 428 (appellate deference to trial court’s Jackson-Denno factual findings)
Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (forfeiture-by-wrongdoing doctrine supporting admission despite confrontation concerns)
Barrett v. State, 289 Ga. 197 (low intelligence alone does not require exclusion of confession absent inability to understand Miranda waiver)
Bradshaw v. State, 296 Ga. 650 (when evidence is admissible under one hearsay exception, court need not decide other exceptions)
Morgan v. State, 290 Ga. 788 (cited for sufficiency review principles)
Zlatogur v. United States, 271 F.3d 1025 (example of forfeiture-by-wrongdoing application)
Brittain v. State, 329 Ga. App. 689 (forfeiture-by-wrongdoing discussion in Georgia appellate context)