Morris v. State
322 Ga. App. 682
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Morris was convicted of criminal street gang activity, criminal attempt to commit armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during a felony.
- Evidence showed Morris was part of the IRC gang planning and executing robberies and shootings, including the Griffin incident and murders of Hargrave and Osby.
- The state admitted Morris’s statements and a gun connected to the Griffin attempt; witnesses testified to IRC activities and Morris’s role.
- Morris challenged a custodial statement as involving a promise of benefit; the trial court denied suppression.
- Morris entered a February 2008 proffer agreement restricting use of proffered statements in later proceedings.
- Morris asserted ineffective assistance of counsel, arguing misadvice about the proffer and failures to object or cross-examine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Morris argues evidence fails to prove all charges beyond a reasonable doubt. | State contends evidence, viewed in light most favorable to verdict, supports all convictions. | Evidence sufficient to sustain convictions. |
| Suppression of custodial statement | Prosecution used a confession tainted by hope of benefit. | No hope of benefit was promised; confession voluntary. | No error; suppression denied. |
| Enforcement of proffer agreement | Proffer agreement was unenforceable due to later plea; violated by state. | Agreement enforceable; no evidence used at trial from proffer. | Proffer agreement properly enforced; no reversible error. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel – general | Counsel failed to properly advise and strategize under proffer rules. | Counsel's conduct was within reasonable professional assistance; strategy is valid. | No deficient performance shown. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel – cross-examination and related actions | Counsel failed to cross-examine key witnesses due to proffer concerns. | Strategy, given proffer constraints, was reasonable. | No prejudice; claims fail. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review standard; no weighing of evidence)
- Edenfield v. State, 293 Ga. 370 (Ga. 2013) (ambit of factual findings in suppression)
- Sosniak v. State, 287 Ga. 279 (Ga. 2010) (hope of benefit related to charges or sentence)
- Stevens v. State, 286 Ga. 692 (Ga. 2010) (proffer agreement context in criminal cases)
- United States v. Pielago, 135 F.3d 703 (11th Cir. 1998) (construction of proffer agreements; contract-law principles)
- Glover v. State, 258 Ga. App. 527 (Ga. App. 2002) (public policy supports enforcement of prosecutorial agreements)
- McCoy v. State, 285 Ga. App. 246 (Ga. App. 2007) (merits of ineffective assistance arguments in Ga. context)
- Works v. State, 301 Ga. App. 108 (Ga. App. 2009) (burden-shifting for ineffective assistance claims)