Perez v. State, 811 S.E.2d 331

Defendant Emmanuel Perez was convicted by a jury of malice murder and related offenses for killing Armando Montez; sentence: life plus five years.
Perez suspected an affair between his wife and the victim; prior confrontations and threats occurred before the shooting.
On the day of the murder Perez confronted the victim at a tire shop, argued while the victim put Perez’s wife on speakerphone, then shot the victim multiple times until his gun jammed.
Perez surrendered shortly afterward, made inculpatory statements (admitting jealousy and that he shot the victim), and had prior indicia of intent (stored phone name “the dead man,” earlier threats reported at the shop).
At trial the State introduced victim’s out-of-court statement to his wife that Perez had threatened to kill him if he “got with [Perez’s] wife,” admitted under OCGA § 24-8-807 (residual exception) over Perez’s hearsay objection.
The trial court admitted the statement; the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed, finding any evidentiary error harmless given overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Issue	Perez's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Admissibility of deceased victim’s out-of-court statement under OCGA § 24-8-807 (residual hearsay exception)	Admission was hearsay and improperly bolstered State’s proof of intent and motive	Statement was admissible under the residual exception (and relevant to motive/intent)	Court assumed possible error but found any error harmless given overwhelming properly admitted evidence; conviction affirmed

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for legal sufficiency of the evidence)
Williams v. State, 302 Ga. 147 (harmless-error review for nonconstitutional evidentiary rulings)
Lance v. State, 275 Ga. 11 (admission of hearsay held harmless where other evidence proved same issue)