Mingledolph v. State
324 Ga. App. 157
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Mingledolph and two others (including Simmons) robbed Coe at gunpoint after Coe had earlier stolen marijuana from an associate; Mingledolph handed Simmons a 9mm and encouraged him to shoot Coe.
- After the robbery the group drove down Luckey Street, saw Harmon’s Suburban (Coe’s associate), and Mingledolph asked to be let out and received the pistol back from Simmons.
- Mingledolph walked toward the Suburban, tried to determine if Coe was inside, then positioned himself nearby; Coe later armed himself with Harmon’s 10mm and left the vehicle.
- An exchange of gunfire occurred between Mingledolph and Coe; Mingledolph fled, and Johnny Davis—sitting in his truck used as cover—was struck and killed by a bullet of undetermined origin.
- A jury convicted Mingledolph of voluntary manslaughter (lesser included of malice murder), possession of a firearm during a crime, and felon-in-possession; Mingledolph appealed the denial of his motion for new trial claiming insufficient evidence on manslaughter and ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Mingledolph's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for voluntary manslaughter | Evidence supported self-defense because prior statements and some witnesses indicated Coe fired first | Mingledolph provoked the confrontation and was the aggressor; jury could credit testimony that Mingledolph fired first | Affirmed — evidence (including robbery, pursuit, waiting for Coe, and eyewitness trial testimony) supports provocation/aggressor finding, so conviction stands |
| Ineffective assistance for failure to call four defense witnesses | Counsel was deficient for calling witnesses who did not appear and failing to continue or present them | Defendant failed to show prejudice because he presented no sworn testimony or acceptable substitute showing what missing witnesses would have said | Affirmed — no prejudice shown under Strickland because defendant did not present witness testimony or admissible substitute at new-trial hearing |
| Use of officer interview summaries to prove missing-witness prejudice | Summaries show two witnesses told police Coe fired first, so prejudice is shown | Investigative summaries are hearsay and not a legally acceptable substitute for sworn testimony at the new-trial hearing | Held — officer case notes are hearsay and cannot satisfy the prejudice prong; claim fails |
| Jury’s resolution of conflicting witness statements | Prior inconsistent statement favors defendant’s self-defense claim | Court: credibility/resolution of conflicts is for the jury; trial testimony supporting prosecution may be credited | Held — jury credited in-court testimony that Mingledolph fired first; appellate court defers to that resolution |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez v. State, 306 Ga. App. 512 (evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdict)
- Lee v. State, 320 Ga. App. 573 (standard for sufficiency review)
- Wade v. State, 305 Ga. App. 819 (consider inferences from evidence in sufficiency review)
- Jackson v. State, 301 Ga. App. 863 (jury resolves conflicting evidence)
- Culver v. State, 290 Ga. App. 321 (single witness testimony can establish a fact)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-part test for ineffective assistance)
- Battles v. State, 290 Ga. 226 (burden under Strickland)
- Grell v. State, 291 Ga. 615 (must present substance of missing witness testimony at motion hearing)
- Dickens v. State, 280 Ga. 320 (investigative summaries are hearsay; not an acceptable substitute for sworn testimony on prejudice)
- Reaves v. State, 292 Ga. 545 (same principle on proving prejudice)
- Boatwright v. State, 281 Ga. App. 560 (failure to present missing witness at motion hearing defeats prejudice showing)