Legregory Collins v. State
333 Ga. App. 565
Ga. Ct. App.2015Background
- Gillespie and Collins were co-defendants convicted after a jury trial for armed robbery and aggravated assault arising from a February 16, 2010 robbery of occupants at an apartment where marijuana was being sold; neither challenges sufficiency of the evidence.
- Defendants were arrested about eight–nine days later; Gillespie was found hiding in a closet where police found ~58.5 grams of marijuana.
- At trial the State introduced booking photographs of the defendants, evidence of the circumstances of Gillespie’s arrest (including the marijuana), and a videotaped statement by a co-defendant (Gresham) referencing Gillespie’s drug dealing.
- Both defendants were not present at bench conferences during jury selection when certain prospective jurors were discussed and excused; defense counsel participated but did not affirmatively memorialize a waiver.
- Trial court partially granted new-trial relief limited to sentencing issues; both defendants appealed the partial denials. The Court of Appeals vacated/remanded for Gillespie and reversed/remanded for Collins.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to be present at bench conferences during voir dire | Collins/Gillespie: they were absent and not informed of the right; presence could have aided counsel on juror excuses | State: absence concerned legal argument or counsel waived/acquiesced; defendant had no useful input | Collins: conviction reversed — absence at a bench conference discussing juror hardship was prejudicial. Gillespie: conviction vacated/remanded for trial court to clarify whether State proved waiver of presence. |
| Admissibility of booking photographs | Collins/Gillespie: photos prejudicial, undated, put character at issue | State: photos used for identification and to show appearance close-in-time to arrest; relevant to witness descriptions | Admissible for both. Any error as to Collins harmless because conviction reversed on other ground. |
| Admission of marijuana found at Gillespie’s arrest (circumstances of arrest) | Gillespie: marijuana unrelated to theft-of-money charge and too remote in time | State: marijuana related to the drug-transaction motive and to the events leading to the robbery; found where he was hiding shortly after arrest | Admissible. Court finds logical relation to the crime and timing not too remote; alternatively, any error harmless given overwhelming evidence. |
| Videotaped co-defendant statement referring to Gillespie as selling weed (motion for mistrial) | Gillespie: statement improperly placed bad character/prior crimes before jury and required mistrial | State: evidence relevant to motive (drugs central to robbery) and admissible to show motive; limiting instruction given | Admissible. No abuse of discretion; relevant to motive and not rendered inadmissible because it incidentally implicated character. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Heywood v. State, 292 Ga. 771 (defendant entitled to be present for juror replacement discussions)
- Zamora v. State, 291 Ga. 512 (right to be present when juror removed)
- Sammons v. State, 279 Ga. 386 (jury composition/selection is a critical stage requiring presence)
- Peterson v. State, 284 Ga. 275 (denial of presence under GA Const. is presumed prejudicial; not subject to harmless-error review)
- Clark v. State, 285 Ga. App. 182 (mug shots do not necessarily place character at issue; admissible for ID)
- Mobley v. State, 198 Ga. App. 497 (mug shot admissible where jury cannot tell it was from a prior arrest)
- Roundtree v. State, 181 Ga. App. 594 (photo inadmissible where caption showed it was taken before charged offense)
- Duckworth v. State, 246 Ga. 631 (mugshot admissible where witnesses described appearance and photo corroborates ID)
- Benford v. State, 272 Ga. 348 (circumstances of arrest admissible if relevant; not automatically barred)
- Burdette v. State, 197 Ga. App. 881 (possession of marijuana at arrest admissible even if charge unrelated where drugs relate to events leading to crime)
- Thornton v. State, 292 Ga. 87 (evidence of drug use/dealing admissible to show motive)
- Bryant v. State, 288 Ga. 876 (drug dealing evidence admissible to establish motive for violent crime)