Hicks v. State, 326 Ga. App. 46

Hicks was convicted of armed robbery, attempted armed robbery, burglary, four counts of aggravated assault, and fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer.
On appeal, Hicks challenges: (1) sufficiency of the evidence; (2) improper jury-venire comments by the trial court; (3) admissibility of the bailiffs’ oath administered by the prosecutor in the presence of the jury pool; (4) ineffective assistance of counsel.
Standard of review is the Jackson v. Virginia sufficiency standard; the verdict must be supported by any rational trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt.
The offense occurred around midnight on April 10, 2010, when Sharita Jones was assaulted at her home by Brown and Hunter, who fled with about $2,000.
A high-speed chase ensued; Hicks was identified as the vehicle’s driver, later giving conflicting statements about involvement; items linked to Hicks and Hunter were found in the vehicle.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to convict Hicks as a party	Hicks argues no direct evidence ties him to the crimes; only fleeing was proven.	Hicks contends he was not a direct participant and that the State failed to prove he aided or conspired.	Evidence shows Hicks as a party to the crimes; sufficient to sustain verdict.
Trial court comments to the jury venire violate OCGA 17-8-57	Trial court remarks improperly commented on guilt/innocence and create prejudice.	Trial counsel failed to object; comments were mere procedural explanations to venire.	No OCGA 17-8-57 violation under the circumstances; not a basis for reversal.
Prosecutor administering oath to bailiffs before the jury pool	Oath administered by prosecutor could bias jurors in favor of State.	Counsel ineffective for not objecting; the act occurred weeks before trial.	No prejudice shown; not reversible; ineffective assistance absent.
Ineffective assistance for failing to call unspecified witnesses	Witnesses could have provided exculpatory or situational testimony.	Counsel acted reasonably; Hicks arguably chose not to testify; insufficient proffer.	Defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice; no ineffective assistance.

Thornton v. State, 292 Ga. 87 (2012) (party-to-crime analysis supports robbery and burglary guilt via getaway driver)
Ates v. State, 155 Ga. App. 97 (1980) (oath administration by prosecutor may be improper; waiver rules differ)
Gardner v. State, 286 Ga. 633 (2010) (waiver and plain error standards for failure to object to trial errors)
Hufstetler v. State, 274 Ga. 343 (2001) (no reasonable prejudice from trial court remarks viewed in totality)
McDaniel v. State, 279 Ga. 801 (2005) (trial court credibility determinations and witness testimony considerations)
Mingledolph v. State, 324 Ga. App. 157 (2013) (missing-witness prejudice requirements for ineffective assistance claims)
Taylor v. State, 264 Ga. App. 665 (2003) (presumption of prejudice and objections to jury procedures)