Mobley v. State, 314 Ga. 38

On April 18, 2018 Jerome Mobley entered his estranged wife Katelyn’s home in violation of a no-contact bond condition and shot and killed her in the presence of their two children.
Earlier (Jan. 16, 2018) Mobley had forced entry, taken the children outside, and was arrested; bond included no-contact provisions he repeatedly violated.
The children reported broken glass, gunshots, and seeing Mobley run from the house; investigators recovered a .38 revolver and shotgun evidence matching weapons later found with Mobley.
Mobley was arrested two days later and had a bullet wound to his leg; he testified Katelyn shot him through a closed bedroom door, that he could not remember what happened after being shot, and that he did not remember shooting her.
Mobley was convicted of malice murder and related counts and sentenced to life without parole plus additional years; he appealed the trial court’s refusal to give a requested jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter.
The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed, holding (1) no evidence showed Mobley’s state of mind (sudden, violent, irresistible passion) after being shot, and (2) the victim’s defensive shooting while Mobley unlawfully entered her home was not sufficient provocation for a reasonable person.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mobley)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the trial court erred by refusing a voluntary manslaughter instruction as a lesser included offense of murder	Being shot multiple times by Katelyn after arguments and her refusal to let him in constituted sufficient provocation to produce a sudden, violent, irresistible passion in a reasonable person	There was no evidence of Mobley’s passion or loss of self-control after being shot; and even if provoked, Katelyn’s use of force in defense of herself and her home while Mobley unlawfully entered is not the kind of provocation that warrants voluntary manslaughter	Affirmed — no manslaughter charge required: lack of evidence on Mobley’s state of mind, and victim’s defensive conduct legally insufficient provocation

Hatney v. State, 308 Ga. 438 (Ga. 2020) (court must give voluntary manslaughter charge if slight evidence of statutory elements exists)
Partridge v. State, 256 Ga. 602 (Ga. 1987) (reasonableness in volunt. manslaughter is an objective standard)
Davenport v. State, 311 Ga. 667 (Ga. 2021) (whether evidence shows provocation for a reasonable person is a question of law)
Scott v. State, 291 Ga. 156 (Ga. 2012) (defendant testimony that he “lost it” supported slight-evidence provocation for manslaughter charge)
Ros v. State, 279 Ga. 604 (Ga. 2005) (victim’s defensive behavior does not ordinarily constitute provocation warranting manslaughter charge)
Nance v. State, 272 Ga. 217 (Ga. 2000) (resistance to armed robbery by victim is not sufficient provocation for voluntary manslaughter)
Turpin v. Christenson, 269 Ga. 226 (Ga. 1998) (defendant-initiated unprovoked criminal acts defeating provocation defense)