Jordan v. State
320 Ga. App. 265
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Anthony Moses Jordan was convicted after a jury trial of burglary, two counts of armed robbery, and two counts of aggravated assault, with specified recidivist and consecutive sentences.
- Appellant-petitioner Jordan challenged the verdicts on grounds of sufficiency of the evidence, ineffective assistance of trial counsel, and evidentiary errors.
- On June 26, 2008, Patrick Johnson and Cynthia Lewis were robbed at their home by masked, gun-wielding intruders who ransacked the house and threatened the victims; a bullet was fired toward Lewis and items were stolen.
- The next day, clothing and a cell phone (not Johnson’s) were found; police recovered a paper inside the phone containing Drayton’s personal information, connecting to Jordan.
- Drayton, Jordan’s girlfriend, provided information to police implicating Jordan; she later testified inconsistently at trial.
- Jordan was arrested three months after the crimes, found hiding in Drayton’s attic; Drayton had initially lied to police about his whereabouts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence for burglary, armed robbery, and aggravated assault | Jordan argues the evidence did not exclude other reasonable hypotheses. | State contends the circumstantial and testimonial evidence, with Drayton’s statements, sufficed. | Evidence sufficient to sustain all convictions. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel re arrest warrants | Counsel should have moved to suppress warrants lacking probable cause. | Warrants not sufficiently challenged; no prejudice from potential suppression. | No prejudice; outcome would not likely have differed even if warrants were excluded. |
| Admission of questions about a letter to Drayton without the letter being produced | Questions infringed Jordan’s character by implying existence of a letter. | No objection below; issue not preserved for appeal; evidence admissible. | Trial court did not err; issue not preserved. |
| Identity/participation evidence linking Jordan to the crime scenes | Drayton’s statements and the phone evidence place Jordan at the scene. | Circumstantial evidence requires only reasonable inferences of participation. | Sufficient to establish Jordan’s participation as a conspirator or aider. |
Key Cases Cited
- Poole v. State, 291 Ga. 848 (Ga. 2012) (circumstantial-evidence standard; sufficiency when identity contested)
- Hart v. State, 305 Ga. App. 259 (Ga. App. 2010) (sufficiency when masked perpetrator identified by circumstantial clues)
- Worley v. State, 201 Ga. App. 704 (Ga. App. 1999) (identifying circumstantial evidence supporting conviction)
- Emerson v. State, 315 Ga. App. 105 (Ga. App. 2012) (evidence of conduct before/after crime supports participation inference)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (US 1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance claims)
- Hill v. State, 291 Ga. 160 (Ga. 2012) (reliance on circumstantial evidence and standard of review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (US 1979) (standard for testing sufficiency of evidence on appeal)