Background

• Owens was convicted by jury of two counts: robbery by sudden snatching for a Waffle House theft and armed robbery for a convenience-store theft.
• The robberies occurred on February 6, 2009 (Waffle House) and February 9, 2009 (convenience store) with victim testimonies describing a similarly dressed African-American male.
• Surveillance video from the Waffle House was aired publicly; Cobb County officer identified Owens from the video, aided by prior familiarity with him from a probation officer who reviewed stills.
• Police recovered a jacket, a discarded jacket, a gun, and Owens’s shoes, linking items to the crimes but with limited direct forensic match proving identity.
• Trial testimony included inadmissible opinion on identity by a probation officer and a Cobb County officer; Owens’s counsel did not object to the probation officer’s certainty about identity.
• The trial court ruled the identification testimony admissible; on appeal, the court held ineffective assistance due to the improper testimony and remanded for a new trial, while preserving the sufficiency of the evidence claim for retrial.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Grimes v. State, 291 Ga. App. 585 (Ga. App. 2008) (identification testimony admissibility standards; eyewitness identification context)
• Dawson v. State, 283 Ga. 315 (Ga. 2008) (identification from surveillance video with partial visibility)
• Roberts v. State, 257 Ga. App. 251 (Ga. App. 2002) (identification admissibility when face partially obscured)
• Bradford v. State, 274 Ga. App. 659 (Ga. App. 2005) (identification based on familiarity with defendant's movements)
• Wadlington v. State, 302 Ga. App. 559 (Ga. App. 2010) (harmful impact of improper identification testimony; potential reversal analysis)