McKibbins v. State
293 Ga. 843
| Ga. | 2013Background
- McKibbins and associates stole two kilograms of cocaine; when the drugs went missing he suspected Demetrius Robbins. McKibbins confronted Robbins at a house on November 18, 2001.
- Neighbors observed a man (Robbins) dragged from the house into an SUV; Robbins’s blood was found near the Wadley Street house.
- Robbins was transported to a Riverdale house, later placed in the trunk of a car, taken to McKibbins’s sister’s house, held in the basement, dismembered, and body parts were distributed and buried at various locations at McKibbins’s direction.
- Rico Green (an accomplice) testified to McKibbins’s central role; multiple non-accomplice witnesses corroborated elements of Green’s account (presence, movements, blood, rental truck, chainsaw, letters from McKibbins, burial activity).
- McKibbins was convicted by a Fulton County jury of malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, and concealing the death of another; he appealed raising sufficiency, indictment sufficiency, prosecutorial misconduct, evidentiary rulings, and jury-charge issues.
Issues
| Issue | McKibbins’s Argument | State’s Position | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence given accomplice testimony | Conviction rests solely on uncorroborated accomplice (Green); insufficient | Green was corroborated by multiple independent witnesses and physical evidence | Affirmed — accomplice testimony adequately corroborated; evidence sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia standard |
| Circumstances of prior robbery (admission of evidence) | Evidence of prior cocaine robbery was improper similar-transaction evidence and notice deficient | Evidence was offered to show motive and context, not as similar transaction | Affirmed — admission proper as motive/context, not similar transaction; no limiting instruction required |
| Prosecutorial remarks (opening/closing) | Several statements ("worst case I’ve ever seen," "You could be next," "I detest [Green] as much as I detest [McKibbins]") were prejudicial and required mistrial | Remarks were either contextual, ambiguous, or promptly cured by the court’s admonitions | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; curative instructions/admonitions sufficient |
| Photographs and autopsy image admission | Gruesome photos and one post-autopsy image were improper and prejudicial | Photos were relevant to identity, malice, injuries, and one post-autopsy photo was necessary to show cerebral bruising | Affirmed — trial court acted within discretion; pre-autopsy photos relevant; post-autopsy photo admissible to show injury |
| Letters sent to jury during deliberations | Letters attempting to influence witnesses should not accompany jury | Letters were original documentary evidence of attempt to influence and permitted to go out with jury | Affirmed — proper to permit originals to go into jury room |
| Jury charge on accomplice corroboration (failure to define “accomplice”) | Court should have defined “accomplice” for jury | Pattern charge was given; “accomplice” is common word and no contemporaneous objection was made | Affirmed — no plain error; pattern instruction adequate |
Key Cases Cited
- Threatt v. State, 293 Ga. 549 (accomplice corroboration rule)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Conklin v. State, 254 Ga. 558 (opening remark about brutality not requiring mistrial)
- McClain v. State, 267 Ga. 378 (Golden Rule argument guidance)
- Stewart v. State, 246 Ga. 70 (indictment tracking statute language generally sufficient)
- Norton v. State, 293 Ga. 332 (post-autopsy photograph admissible when autopsy reveals material fact)
- McGee v. State, 267 Ga. 560 (trial court curative action can obviate mistrial)