Mills v. State, 308 Ga. 558

On Dec. 23, 2017 Masuto Garrett was shot and killed; Roger Mills and co-defendant Moses Bolar were tried jointly for malice murder and related aggravated assault counts.
At trial the State presented eyewitness accounts, surveillance and cell‑phone video (video did not show the shooting), shell casings and ballistics linking bullets to 9mm handguns; Mills and Bolar did not testify.
After more than four hours of deliberation jurors sent a note saying one juror believed the defendants were not guilty based on the evidence. The court sent them home to resume the next day.
The next day, after additional deliberations, the jury reported one juror (Juror 23) did not believe any witness or State evidence and said only a clear high‑resolution in‑house video showing both defendants firing would change her mind.
The trial judge asked the jury to identify the juror, then removed Juror 23 for being unable to perform her duty and for not following instructions, replaced her with the alternate, and instructed the jury to restart deliberations; Mills objected.
The jury convicted Mills; the Supreme Court of Georgia held the trial court abused its discretion in removing the holdout juror without adequate inquiry and reversed Mills’s convictions; the Court also found the trial evidence legally sufficient (so retrial is permitted).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court properly excused a lone holdout juror during deliberations without adequate inquiry or legal cause	Mills: Removal was error — juror merely disagreed, did not refuse to deliberate, and court made only a very limited inquiry before excusing her	State: Court has discretion under OCGA § 15‑12‑172 to remove a juror who cannot perform duties or follow instructions; juror demanded unrealistic proof and was not following instructions	Court reversed: removal was an abuse of discretion because juror’s dissent alone did not show incapacity; limited inquiry provided no sound basis for excusal and the error was harmful
Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support convictions	Mills did not contest sufficiency	State: evidence (ballistics, videos, witnesses, social‑media photos) supports verdicts	Court independently reviewed under Jackson v. Virginia and held evidence was legally sufficient; reversal based solely on juror removal, so retrial permitted

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes legal‑sufficiency standard for criminal convictions)
State v. Arnold, 280 Ga. 487 (trial court must have sound basis and, where basis not obvious, conduct inquiry before dismissing juror)
Semega v. State, 302 Ga. App. 879 (heightened need for investigation when jury is deliberating or deadlocked; error to release juror who simply reached a different decision)
Wallace v. State, 303 Ga. 34 (minority juror’s disagreement alone does not render juror incapacitated; replacing a dissenting juror can be abuse of discretion)
Jones v. State, 307 Ga. 463 (upheld removal where juror stopped participating; contrasted with improper removal of mere holdout)
Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (jurors determine witness credibility and resolve conflicts in evidence)
Favors v. State, 305 Ga. 366 (presumption that qualified jurors follow court instructions)