Moon v. State, 288 Ga. 508

Two defendants Moon and Martin, tried jointly for felony murder during an armed-robbery attempt, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm during a crime; malice murder and handgun during malice murder were found not proven.
Victim Thomas, a drug dealer, was killed during a home invasion-robbery committed by two masked gunmen; Moon wore a red shirt and was linked to one of the gunmen.
Martin arid Moon were identified as participants; eyewitness and forensic evidence tied the handgun to Martin and linked Moon to the shooting.
Ms. Johnson cooperated after pleading; telephone conversations captured incriminating statements by Martin.
Police recovered a Taurus 9mm handgun from Martin’s residence; ballistic evidence connected the handgun to the autopsy shell casings.
Trial court denied motions for new trial; Moon and Martin challenged severance, cross-examination scope, admission of prior-consistent statements, juror removal, and potential counsel-conflict issues; verdicts affirmed for S10A1668 (Moon) and S10A1671 (Martin).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Severance of Moon from Martin	Moon argues severance necessary due to spillover and antagonistic defenses.	Moon contends joint trial prejudiced his defense.	Court wide discretion; no prejudice shown; severance denied.
Limitation of cross-examination of Moon’s witnesses	Moon claims cross-exam over prior similar crime was relevant.	Evidence irrelevant and would confuse jury.	Trial court allowed focused cross-examination; limitation not an abuse.
Admission of prior consistent statement (Brown)	Prosecution used prior consistent statement to bolster credibility.	Statement inadmissible as hearsay since not predating motive.	Admission erroneous but harmless given strong other evidence.
Juror Patterson’s removal during deliberations	Removal based on impartiality concerns biased against Moon and Martin.	Removal needed to preserve impartial deliberations.	Courts found ample basis for removal after inquiry; no abuse of discretion.
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel (Moon and Martin)	Conflict-of-interest or strategic decisions prejudiced defendants.	Counsel performed within reasonable professional conduct; no prejudice shown.	No ineffective-assistance shown; denials affirmed.

Krause v. State, 286 Ga. 745, 691 S.E.2d 211 (2010) (2010) (severance factors and prejudice standard in joint trials)
Oliver v. State, 253 Ga. 284, 319 S.E.2d 856 (1984) (1984) (joint trial considerations; spillover evidence)
Styles v. State, 279 Ga. 134, 610 S.E.2d 23 (2005) (2005) (co-conspirator statements admissibility)
White v. State, 253 Ga. 106, 317 S.E.2d 196 (1984) (1984) (scope of cross-examination; trial discretion)
Duggan v. State, 285 Ga. 363, 677 S.E.2d 92 (2009) (2009) (harmless error for prior-consistent statements)
Baugh v. State, 276 Ga. 736, 585 S.E.2d 616 (2003) (2003) (prior consistent statements and impeachment)
Hill v. State, 269 Ga. 23, 494 S.E.2d 661 (1998) (1998) (conflict of interest factors in evaluating counsel effectiveness)
Fogarty v. State, 270 Ga. 609, 513 S.E.2d 493 (1999) (1999) (acquittals and effectiveness standard (cautionary note))
State v. Arnold, 280 Ga. 487, 629 S.E.2d 807 (2006) (2006) (judicial inquiry into juror impartiality; standard for inquiry)
Reynolds v. State, 271 Ga. 174, 517 S.E.2d 51 (1999) (1999) (juror-removal considerations)