Parks v. State, 302 Ga. 345

On December 18, 2010 Lyndon “Pookie” Tucker was shot to death; indictment charged Parks (aka Harris) and co-defendant Doyle with malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and firearm offenses. Jury convicted both; Parks sentenced to life without parole plus additional years.
Key eyewitness/accomplice: Keith Richardson testified he drove Parks and others the night of the shooting, waited in the vehicle, heard gunshots after they went to a junkyard, and drove the men home following the shooting. Richardson had a history of drug addiction and sometimes drove Parks in exchange for money or drugs.
Independent evidence placed Parks’ cell phone near the tow-yard where Tucker worked at the time of the shooting and showed tower connections consistent with the route Richardson described after the shooting.
Other corroborating evidence: neighbor saw a blue Ford and a passenger making shooting motions; Kerry Henderson saw Parks in the passenger seat of a blue SUV that night and reported Parks and Doyle later admitted killing the victim (she testified she could not recall but was treated as hostile). Forensics: nine 7.62 mm shell casings and wound/bullet evidence consistent with an SKS/AK-47 type rifle.
Trial court admitted Henderson’s prior inconsistent statement to police as substantive evidence (she testified but claimed no recollection); the State argued Richardson was an accomplice and required corroboration under OCGA § 24-14-82.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to sustain convictions	State: combined accomplice testimony plus independent corroboration (cell records, witness observations, Henderson’s statements, ballistics) supports conviction beyond reasonable doubt	Parks: Richardson was an accomplice and his testimony was uncorroborated and therefore insufficient	Court: Evidence (including cell records, eyewitness observations, Henderson’s out‑of‑court statements, and ballistics) sufficiently corroborated accomplice testimony; conviction affirmed
Admissibility / weight of Henderson’s prior statement	State: admissible as prior inconsistent statement and substantive evidence because witness testified and was cross‑examined	Parks: Henderson’s statement should not be considered to corroborate Richardson because she disclaimed recollection	Court: Henderson’s prior inconsistent statement admissible (witness testified and was subject to cross‑examination); it could be used for corroboration

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence review)
Lewis v. State, 301 Ga. 759 (corroboration of accomplice testimony may be slight and circumstantial)
Huff v. State, 300 Ga. 807 (corroboration rules for accomplice testimony)
Terrell v. State, 300 Ga. 81 (applying Jackson sufficiency standard)
Jackson v. State, 292 Ga. 685 (prior inconsistent statements admissible where witness testifies and is cross‑examined)
Brewner v. State, 302 Ga. 6 (treatment of prior inconsistent statements as substantive evidence)
Hood v. State, 299 Ga. 95 (prior inconsistent statements and impeachment/substantive use)
McNair v. State, 330 Ga. App. 478 (prior inconsistent statements admissibility)