Minor v. State
328 Ga. App. 128
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- On Dec. 19, 2011 two men attacked Jose Hernandez (J.H.) and Bardomiano Hernandez (B.H.) on a path in Cobb County; one assailant’s hoodie fell revealing his face and both victims identified that man (Clayton). The other assailant’s face had been covered (Minor not identified by victims).
- Officer Slatton observed a scuffle, followed the fleeing suspects into an apartment complex, radioed other officers, and two men in dark clothing (later Clayton and Minor) were detained shortly thereafter. A showup identification at the scene resulted in positive ID of Clayton and non-identification of Minor.
- Police recovered J.H.’s cell phone and a black skull cap with a slit near the fence the suspects had jumped; hair fragments in the cap did not match Minor on testable samples but some fragments were untestable, so Minor could not be definitively excluded. No gun was recovered.
- Both defendants were tried together, convicted of armed robbery and attempt to commit armed robbery, and appealed after denial of their motions for new trial. The Court affirmed convictions but remanded for further Batson findings regarding one juror (Juror No. 31).
- Key contested issues on appeal: (1) sufficiency of evidence (Minor), (2) ineffective assistance for failure to object to a jury-charge misstatement (Minor and Clayton), (3) alleged improper sequential/verdict-form instruction, (4) Batson challenge to several peremptory strikes (both defendants), and (5) Clayton’s claim counsel was ineffective for not moving to suppress the showup ID.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict Minor | State: circumstantial evidence (flight, clothing, proximity, mask/hat found, hair inconclusive) supports identity/abetting | Minor: victims did not identify him; hat hairs did not match | Affirmed: circumstantial evidence sufficient for conviction beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Ineffective assistance for failure to object to jury-charge misstatement (burden) | State: charge as a whole properly instructed burden on State; slip of the tongue harmless | Minor/Clayton: counsel deficient for not objecting to misstatement that "burden rests on the Defendant" | No relief: even if deficient, no prejudice shown; charge read as whole cured the slip; not plain error |
| Sequential verdict-form instruction (order of considering armed robbery, robbery, acquittal) | State: instruction appropriate for greater and lesser included offenses with reasonable-doubt standard | Minor: instruction invaded jury province and violated Edge rule on sequential charges | No plain error: Edge limited and sequential charges permissible for armed robbery/robbery where reasonable-doubt standard given |
| Batson challenge to peremptory strikes (esp. Juror No. 31) | Defendants: prosecutor used most strikes on black veniremen and cited gold teeth and a theft-related charge for Juror 31 (stereotype) | State: race-neutral reasons—prior theft-related charge; gold-teeth comment secondary/not determinative | Remand for Batson findings as to Juror 31: trial court failed to allow full defense response and did not make required Batson findings; new trial required if strike found pretextual; other challenged strikes upheld (Clayton) |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (prohibition on race-based peremptory strikes; three-step framework)
- Toomer v. State, 292 Ga. 49 (Georgia Supreme Court on Batson and need for strict application of framework)
- Dolphy v. State, 288 Ga. 705 (plain-error standard; no plain error where slip of the tongue harmless when charge considered as whole)