Mathis v. State
293 Ga. 837
Ga.2013Background
- On Oct. 19, 2008, Jessie Ben Mathis and co-defendants entered the Thai Video store, announced themselves, forced customers to the floor, and the store owner was shot and killed; co-defendant Kilgore was alleged to have fired the fatal shot.
- After the robbery the defendants threatened victims, displayed the victim’s body and a bloody gun, and fled together; Armstrong later gave money to his girlfriend Anderson and admitted participation.
- Anderson told a friend, who contacted police; Anderson then informed police of Armstrong’s statements implicating Mathis and Kilgore.
- Two eyewitnesses identified Mathis in photographic lineups and at trial.
- Mathis was convicted by a jury of felony murder, multiple counts of armed robbery and aggravated assault, and possession of a weapon during a crime; he received life plus consecutive terms.
- Mathis appealed denial of his motion for new trial, raising sufficiency, juror-sleeping issues, ineffective assistance, admissibility of co-conspirator statements, suggestive photo lineup, and directed verdict on two aggravated-assault counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mathis) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for convictions | Evidence fails to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt | Evidence (eyewitness IDs, co-conspirator statements, conduct) supports convictions | Affirmed; evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia |
| Alleged sleeping juror / failure to excuse juror | Trial court should have inquired and replaced juror; counsel should have renewed motion | Court promptly remedied by instructing jurors and using "buddy system"; no further inquiry required; issue waived by counsel’s failure to renew | Waived; even if considered, no abuse of discretion in denying replacement |
| Ineffective assistance for not requesting juror inquiry | Counsel was deficient and prejudiced for not requesting an inquiry | Counsel’s decisions presumed strategic; no deficient performance shown | Claim fails under Strickland; defendant cannot satisfy first prong |
| Admissibility of Armstrong’s statements under co-conspirator exception | Statements were hearsay and inadmissible against Mathis | Independent evidence of conspiracy existed; statements made during concealment stage so admissible under OCGA § 24-3-5 | Admissible; trial court did not err |
| Photographic lineup suggestiveness and pretrial ID suppression | Photographs made Mathis stand out (darker photo, different hair/complexion), creating likely misidentification | Lineups included similar-looking males; witnesses had good opportunity and certainty; no impermissible suggestiveness | Denial of suppression affirmed; no substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification |
| Directed verdict on two aggravated-assault counts | Indictment requires victim’s reasonable apprehension and victims testified they were not afraid or not harmed | Aggravated assault requires intent to rob plus assault; victims’ acts (obeying orders, surrendering phone, hearing gunshots) support reasonable apprehension | Denial of directed verdict affirmed; evidence supports aggravated-assault convictions |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test)
- Smith v. State, 277 Ga. 213 (juror-sleeping principles and counsel duties)
- Gibson v. State, 290 Ga. 6 (removal appropriate where juror repeatedly slept)
- Marshall v. State, 285 Ga. 351 (standard for photographic identification challenges)
- Freeman v. State, 273 Ga. 137 (evidence establishing common design/conspiracy)