Love v. State
309 Ga. 833
Ga.2020Background
- Defendant Antavian Love was 16 when Enrique Trejo was shot and killed on June 18–19, 2016; video and witness evidence placed Trejo with three occupants the night he disappeared.
- Trejo was found shot multiple times; his wallet (with cash) remained on his person and his Ford Expedition was missing.
- Police located the stolen Expedition; after a foot chase Love was detained, Mirandized with a juvenile waiver form, and gave a recorded confession about shooting Trejo.
- Physical evidence tied a .40-caliber handgun recovered from Love’s bedroom to casings and bullets at the scene; a fingerprint on a magazine matched Love.
- A jury convicted Love of malice murder and related offenses; he was sentenced to life without parole for murder.
- On appeal Love challenged (1) denial of suppression of his custodial statement and (2) imposition of juvenile life-without-parole as violating Miller/Montgomery principles.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Convictions unsupported (implicit) | Evidence and witness accounts establish guilt | Court found evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia and affirmed conviction |
| Voluntariness / suppression of custodial statement | Love contends he did not knowingly/voluntarily waive rights: officers failed to promptly notify mother, he was not allowed to contact her or an attorney, and questioning suggested help/pressure | State: officers Mirandized Love with juvenile form; Love initialed and signed waiver, did not request parent or counsel before confessing, and interrogation contained no threats or promises | Trial court credited officers; on totality, waiver was knowing and voluntary; suppression denial affirmed |
| Juvenile LWOP — irreparable corruption determination | Love argues record did not support finding he was irreparably corrupt and thus juvenile LWOP unconstitutional as applied | State presented juvenile adjudication history, escalating delinquency, violent school incidents, lack of remorse, planning and execution of murder, and post-conviction violence | Court held trial court made a reasoned on-record determination that Love is "irreparably corrupt"; sentence affirmed under Miller/Montgomery and Georgia precedent |
| Challenge to permitting juvenile LWOP on policy/evolving-standards grounds | Love urged broader ban, reliance on international norms, and that irreparable-corruption findings are unreliable without experts | State relied on U.S. Supreme Court and Georgia precedent allowing LWOP for rare juveniles after case-specific findings; policy changes belong to legislature | Court declined to depart from Supreme Court precedent; left policy reform to legislature; affirmed sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda warnings and waiver framework)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutional sufficiency-of-evidence standard)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (juvenile LWOP requires consideration of youth characteristics)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (Miller applies retroactively and juvenile LWOP reserved for the rare irreparably corrupt)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (limits on juvenile life sentences and difficulty distinguishing transient immaturity from irreparable corruption)
- Veal v. State, 298 Ga. 691 (Georgia requirement for on-the-record juvenile irreparable-corruption determination)
- White v. State, 307 Ga. 601 (Georgia standard that preponderance is sufficient to support juvenile LWOP and discussion of required findings)