Nichols v. State
292 Ga. 290
Ga.2013Background
- Nichols appeals his malice murder conviction, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.
- The evidence at trial was largely circumstantial, and the appeal cites reasonable-doubt concerns and alternative-perpetrator hypotheses.
- The victim Alma Nichols died October 12, 2008, from strangulation; medical evidence showed neck hemorrhages and hyoid fracture, not smoke inhalation.
- Nichols’ statements to police and changes during questioning are noted against the inconsistent details.
- The jury convicted on all charges; the standard is whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, supports guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The case cites Jackson v. Virginia and related circumstantial-evidence doctrine to uphold the verdict.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the evidence sufficient to support malice-murder conviction? | Nichols argues the evidence is against the verdict. | Nichols contends reasonable-doubt exists due to alternate explanations. | Yes; evidence viewed most favorably supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (establishes standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Cutrer v. State, 287 Ga. 272 (Ga. 2010) (circumstantial-evidence standard; exclude every reasonable hypothesis of guilt)
- Sims v. State, 278 Ga. 587 (Ga. 2004) (jury resolves reasonable-doubt questions in circumstantial cases)