Marshall v. State, 297 Ga. 445

Victim Alan O’Neal was shot and killed outside Carlos Coleman’s house; witnesses heard multiple shooters and exchanged gunfire with O’Neal.
Levi Marshall was later treated for a gunshot wound to the leg and initially gave investigators a false account of being shot several miles away; he later admitted being in the neighborhood behind Coleman’s house.
Prosecution theory: Marshall and at least one accomplice approached the side of Coleman’s house and shot O’Neal; eyewitness and circumstantial evidence tied Marshall to the scene and clothing descriptions.
Additional evidence: jailhouse inmate testified Marshall liked and carried handguns and had previously lied to police about a firearm incident; a detective related third‑party statements about Marshall’s presence behind the house.
Marshall was convicted of malice murder and making a false statement to law enforcement; he received life plus five years. He appealed, raising sufficiency and multiple ineffective‑assistance claims. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Marshall)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt	Eyewitness testimony, Marshall’s presence/admissions, forensic evidence and other witnesses supported convictions	Affirmed: evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia
Failure to object to detective’s hearsay about Bright→Coleman statement	Counsel ineffective for not objecting to hearsay that Marshall entered the lane with Anthony	Testimony was cumulative and the challenged detail did not alter the outcome given other evidence	No prejudice; claim fails under Strickland
Failure to object to Patel’s testimony about propensity/prior false statement	Counsel ineffective for not excluding propensity and prior‑act testimony under OCGA §24‑4‑404	Ownership/frequent carriage of a pistol not character impeachment; prior false‑statement evidence was cumulative given overwhelming proof of the charged false statement	No prejudice shown; admission harmless and claim fails under Strickland
Counsel inattentive/asleep and cumulative error	Counsel’s inattentiveness (head on table) and other errors deprived Marshall of effective assistance	Court found no Cronic presumptive prejudice; any lapse was outside norms but did not admit excluding evidence or change outcome; cumulative errors not reasonably likely to affect verdict	No ineffective assistance; cumulative‑error claim fails

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Smith v. Francis, 253 Ga. 782 (1985) (Georgia application of Strickland; strong presumption of reasonable counsel)
United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984) (circumstances requiring automatic reversal for lack of counsel)