Menefee v. State
301 Ga. 505
| Ga. | 2017Background
- On May 5, 2012, Daniel and Jamol Alexander drove with friends to Hickory Park to buy marijuana from Christian; the group brought firearms because the area had a reputation for danger.
- Christian allegedly pulled a gun on Daniel and attempted to rob him; during a struggle Christian told nearby associates to “shoot,” and Menefee and another man (with dreadlocks) fired into the car.
- Antonias Williams (passenger) was fatally shot in the back of the head; Jamol was wounded. Ballistics did not match weapons recovered from the victims’ car; gunpowder in the wound indicated a close-range shot.
- Menefee and Christian (and co-defendant Clements) were tried jointly; Menefee and Christian were convicted of malice murder and related offenses and sentenced to life plus concurrent terms.
- On appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court reviewed sufficiency, requested jury charges, ineffective assistance claims tied to prosecutor argument, and sentencing/merger errors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict Menefee as party to attempted armed robbery and aggravated assault | State: conduct before/during/after supported inference Menefee aided Christian’s robbery scheme and fired fatal shot | Menefee: no evidence he committed crimes against the Alexanders | Affirmed — jury could infer aiding and abetting; evidence sufficient under Jackson standard |
| Failure to charge mutual combat and voluntary manslaughter (Menefee) | Menefee: requested charges should have been given | State: evidence showed one-sided encounter initiated by Christian; no sudden provocation or mutual combat | Waived by Menefee; invited error and ineffective-assistance claim fails because charges unsupported by evidence |
| Ineffective assistance for failure to object to prosecutor’s opening/closing (Christian) | Christian: prosecutor’s statements constituted misconduct, golden rule violations, vouching, inflaming jury, misrepresenting evidence; counsel should have objected | State: arguments were within wide latitude, reasonable inferences, and trial court admonitions cure any error; counsel’s performance not deficient or prejudicial | Denied — counsel not deficient; even assuming deficiency, no prejudice shown given court instructions and evidence |
| Sentencing/merger errors | Appellants: trial court merged attempted armed robbery into malice murder and sentenced aggravated assault of victim separately | State: (responding) trial court’s rulings | Partially vacated and remanded — aggravated assault of the homicide victim must merge into malice murder; attempted armed robbery does not merge and defendants must be resentenced on that count |
Key Cases Cited
- Jordan v. State, 272 Ga. 395 (party liability may be inferred from conduct before, during, after crime)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Hulett v. State, 296 Ga. 49 (merger rules and appellate correction of sentencing errors)
- Biddy v. State, 253 Ga. 289 (different victims/elements preclude merger)
- Slaughter v. State, 292 Ga. 573 (vacatur and merger when aggravated assault produces fatal injury without intervening intent)
- Woodard v. State, 296 Ga. 803 (invited error / contemporaneous objection rules)