Holmes v. State, 293 Ga. 229

Holmes appeals his convictions for malice murder, possession of a firearm during a felony, and RICO violation arising from Rawls's death.
Rawls, a prostitute, had been Holmes's worker and had recently expressed intent to leave prostitution; she feared Holmes.
Two days before the murder, Emma Grant helped Holmes organize surveillance against Rawls; a white SUV with tinted windows was rented and used near Rawls's residence.
In the hours before the murder, a white SUV repeatedly drove in the complex parking lot; a resident captured the SUV's license plate and Holmes's fingerprints were found on the SUV rental agreement.
Holmes's cell phone calls proximate to the shooting originated near the crime scene; Holmes and Andre Smith were later arrested and a pistol linked to Rawls's killing was recovered in a separate incident.
At trial, the prosecution presented evidence linking Holmes to the vehicle, calls, and weapon; Holmes challenged suppression and claimed ineffective assistance of counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Holmes argues the evidence does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the charged crimes.	Holmes contends the State failed to prove elements of malice murder, firearm possession, and RICO.	Evidence supports guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Motion to suppress fruits of stop and search	The stop and search were unlawful because no local ordinance was proven and the stop lacked articulable suspicion.	The stop was valid under reasonable suspicion and the evidence derived from it was admissible.	Trial court properly denied suppression; stop supported by articulable suspicion and subsequent searches were lawful.
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel's performance was deficient and prejudicial, warranting new trial.	Counsel made reasonable strategic choices; no prejudice shown.	Defense requests for new trial based on ineffective assistance are rejected.

Ciak v. State, 278 Ga. 27 (2004) (reasonable suspicion standard under Ciak for investigative stops)
Burgeson v. State, 267 Ga. 102 (1996) (probable cause/stop-questions framework in searches)
In the Interest of D. H., 285 Ga. 51 (2009) (authority to question and search given circumstances)
State v. Cauley, 282 Ga. App. 191 (2006) (no local ordinance proof required for stop/search under totality of circumstances)
Barrett v. State, 289 Ga. 197 (2011) (denial of suppression affirmed where insufficient merit to overturn trial)
Jackson v. State, 282 Ga. 494 (2007) (standard for sufficiency of evidence; Jackson v. Virginia cited)