Mays v. State
317 Ga. App. 24
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Mays appeals the denial of her motion for a new trial after convictions for aggravated battery, possession of a firearm during a crime, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
- On August 17, 2008, Shante Rogers, riding in a vehicle with two women, had an altercation on the phone that was allegedly with Mays; the car then went to Mays’s residence where Mays and two women stood on the front porch or sidewalk.
- Rogers testified that Mays immediately started shooting upon exit from the car; Rogers was shot and permanently paralyzed; Rogers and her companions claimed no weapons were possessed.
- A Rogers’ companion testified Rogers did not enter Mays’s property; Mays began shooting in the yard with the other two women leaving the vehicle and Rogers near 15 to 18 feet away.
- Mays testified she was in her front yard, confronted by Rogers who allegedly carried a metal pole; Mays claimed she feared for her life and fired to defend herself; she stated she did not want to fight.
- Before trial, defense requested a jury instruction on use of force in defense of habitation; the court refused, citing lack of intrusion on habitation and Mays’s felon status in possession of a firearm.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance re defense of habitation instruction | Mays argues counsel failed to object to the court’s refusal to give the habitation defense charge. | The court correctly refused; no evidence supported the charge because Rogers did not entry or attack the habitation. | No deficient performance or prejudice; no reversible error. |
| Malice definition in aggravated battery | Mays contends the jury should have been instructed on the definition of malice. | Malice is inherent in the offense; no separate definition required. | No error; malice instruction not required beyond statute. |
| Admissibility of police statement after invoking counsel | Mays challenges the admissibility of a statement at the police station after she indicated a desire for counsel. | Issue preserved and the statement properly admitted; Edwards rule applied; credibility resolves facts. | Affirmed; no reversible error; argument not preserved or meritless. |
| Preservation and Edwards rule application | Edwards rule boundaries were misapplied; invoked right to counsel; subsequent statements should be suppressed. | Record shows waiver and that the issue was fact-bound and not reversible. | Preservation lacking or without error; Edwards rule applied in favor of court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Coleman v. State, 286 Ga. 291 (Ga. 2009) (merits of ineffective assistance and charge issues)
- Darden v. State, 233 Ga. App. 353 (Ga. App. 1998) (trial court credibility and factual findings on suppression)
- Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1981) (right to counsel; interrogation after invoking counsel)
- Brady v. State, 259 Ga. 573 (Ga. 1989) (self-defense and justificatory standards)
- Miller v. State, 288 Ga. 286 (Ga. 2010) (evidence sufficiency and charge considerations)
- Blanch v. State, 293 Ga. App. 750 (Ga. App. 2008) (definitional scope of aggravated battery elements)
- State v. Burks, 285 Ga. 781 (Ga. 2009) (immunity provisions and defense interplay with felony possessions)
- Harvard v. State, 162 Ga. App. 218 (Ga. App. 1982) (absence of entry into habitation negates defense of habitation)