Hill v. State, 310 Ga. 180

Background:

Defendant Otis Hill (aka “Gage”) sold cocaine to Christina and Marshall Wellington, demanded immediate payment, displayed a 9mm handgun, and threatened their lives.
Under threat, the Wellingtons accompanied Hill and Aviance Marshall (driver) to panhandle; later Hill directed the car to a dark gravel road in Union City, forced them out, and shot both — Christina died, Marshall severely injured.
Marshall identified Hill at the hospital from a photographic lineup; cell‑site location records and Hill’s own admissions linked him to the scene; Aviance cooperated and testified for the State.
Hill was indicted on multiple counts (malice murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault/battery, weapons); tried in Nov. 2014, convicted on all counts, and sentenced (including life without parole for malice murder and kidnapping).
On appeal Hill raised numerous claims: insufficiency as to kidnapping, jury composition/master list, juror English proficiency, jury note‑taking, admission of cell‑site data and other evidence, limits on cross‑examination about cooperator’s punishment, reasonable‑doubt instruction plain‑error, ineffective assistance, and general‑grounds new‑trial issues.

Issues:

Issue	Hill's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of kidnapping evidence	Wellingtons went voluntarily to panhandle and were not abducted	Hill threatened them with a gun and forced them to go and be held against their will	Evidence sufficient to support kidnapping convictions
Master jury list / jury composition	Fulton County removed jurors via legacy/undeliverable mail, violating Jury Composition Rule and fair cross‑section	Hill waived the challenge by not raising it when jury was empaneled	Waived on appeal; no relief
Prospective juror English proficiency	Juror said he worried about language; Hill says court should have probed or struck juror	Trial court questioned juror; defense did not ask to strike, and judge found juror not credible	Not preserved; no plain error; counsel not ineffective for not pursuing removal
Jury note‑taking instruction	Instruction encouraged jurors to rely on others’ notes and may have influenced verdicts	Court used pattern instruction emphasizing jurors must rely on own recollection	Instruction proper as given; no counsel deficiency for not objecting
Admission of cell‑site location evidence without warrant	CSLI obtained without a warrant; should have been excluded under Carpenter	Even if admission was error, evidence was cumulative and State’s case was overwhelming	Any error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; no reversal
Cross‑examination about cooperator Aviance’s avoided penalties	Defense should have been allowed to elicit full maximum penalties Aviance avoided	Court allowed questioning about life sentence and deal but limited detail to avoid injecting sentencing into jury’s deliberations	Court did not abuse discretion; defense obtained core impeachment; no error
Admission of statement suggesting a witness wouldn’t appear (witness intimidation)	Statement prejudicial and should be excluded under Rule 403	Trial court admitted limited testimony as probative of knowledge; objection made and court balanced prejudice	Any error harmless given strength of evidence; no reversal
Toxicologist testimony on cocaine’s effects on memory	Witness not qualified to testify about cocaine’s effect on memory; bolstered Marshall’s credibility	Counsel strategically used testimony to impeach Marshall’s reliability; no record of counsel’s reasoning ≠ ineffective assistance	No ineffective assistance shown; counsel’s approach reasonable and used in closing argument
Failure to object to prosecutor’s closing (personal attacks)	Prosecutor’s remarks were improper; counsel should have objected	Counsel strategically refrained to avoid antagonizing jury; tactic reasonable	Strategic choice; not ineffective assistance
Reasonable‑doubt instruction (plain error)	Phrases like “discover the truth” or “honestly seeking the truth” lowered burden to preponderance	Instructions were pattern language, previously upheld; no controlling authority declaring them plainly erroneous	Not plain error; no ineffective assistance for failing to object
New‑trial general grounds / thirteenth juror review	Successor judge denied general‑grounds new trial without reading entire transcript; remand required	Hill’s counsel knew judge would review excerpts and did not preserve objection; counsel prepared proposed order omitting general‑grounds relief	Claim waived/abandoned by counsel’s conduct; no remand
Sentencing merger errors	(Court noted) Some counts duplicated same conduct leading to separate sentences	State agreed merger principles apply where offenses are not factually distinct	Counts 8 and 9 (aggravated assault and aggravated battery) merged into attempted murder; convictions/sentences for those counts vacated

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency review: evidence must permit a rational trier of fact to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) (warrant generally required for multi‑day historical cell‑site location information)
Ricks v. State, 301 Ga. 171 (2017) (Fulton County master jury list production violated Jury Composition Rule for specified period)
Young v. State, 232 Ga. 285 (1974) (challenge to jury lists must be made when the jury is impaneled or is waived)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance + prejudice)
Keller v. State, 308 Ga. 492 (2020) (limits of plain‑error review; enumerates areas where appellate courts may apply plain error)
McCord v. State, 305 Ga. 318 (2019) (constitutional errors in evidentiary rulings may be harmless where evidence is cumulative or guilt overwhelming)
Williams v. State, 292 Ga. 844 (2013) (defendant entitled to cross‑examine witness about punishment avoided via deal for impeachment purposes)