Propst v. State
299 Ga. 557
| Ga. | 2016Background
- In Oct. 2011 Propst and co-defendant Hacker drove from North Carolina to Monroe, GA for a drug buy; Hacker testified they planned and executed the theft of pills and cash and fled in a car.
- During the escape Propst (from passenger side) fired a .45; Silas Smith was shot and paralyzed. Shell casing, gun, pill bottles, and cash were recovered and matched to the crime. Propst gave a custodial statement admitting involvement and that he fired the weapon.
- A Walton County grand jury indicted Propst on multiple counts including armed robbery, aggravated battery/assault, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and firearm-in-felony enhancements. At trial the jury convicted on two counts of robbery (lesser included), several aggravated assault/battery counts, and related firearm counts; other counts were merged.
- Propst moved pretrial for dismissal under former OCGA § 16-3-24.2 (self-defense immunity); the court denied the motion after finding the statute constitutional under rational basis review.
- Post-trial claims raised on appeal: insufficiency of the evidence (including venue), equal protection challenge to the immunity statute, ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to challenge a statute and to request a written impeachment charge), and a Brady claim regarding a 911 recording.
Issues
| Issue | Propst's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for robbery (accomplice corroboration) | Convictions rest on accomplice Hacker’s uncorroborated testimony; insufficient under OCGA § 24-14-8 | Hacker’s testimony was corroborated by Crankshaw, Propst’s confession, and physical evidence (shell casing, gun, powder burn, recovered items) | Evidence sufficient to support robbery convictions; corroboration satisfied the statutory/precedent standard (Jackson v. Virginia; Taylor v. State) |
| Venue for shooting-related counts | No direct proof county of shooting; convictions invalid without venue beyond reasonable doubt | Circumstantial evidence tied investigation and evidence custody to Walton County (officers, property receipts, evidence room, Walton forms) supporting venue | Venue was adequately proven circumstantially; jury could find crimes occurred in Walton County |
| Equal protection challenge to former OCGA § 16-3-24.2 (pre-trial immunity) | Propst (a convicted felon) argued the statute infringed his fundamental right to self-defense and thus required strict scrutiny | Statute is procedural (pre-trial immunity), does not bar asserting self-defense at trial, felons are not a suspect class; apply rational basis; statute applies equally to those unlawfully carrying/possessing weapons | Court applied rational basis and upheld the statute as constitutional; Propst failed to show disparate treatment of similarly situated persons |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to challenge OCGA § 16-3-21(b)(2) | Counsel unreasonably failed to challenge the statute as vague/overbroad | No controlling authority supported a viable challenge at trial; not objectively unreasonable to forego novel/meritless objections | No deficient performance; decision not to pursue unsupportable constitutional challenge was reasonable |
| Ineffective assistance / plain error — failure to request/give written jury charge on impeachment by prior inconsistent statements | Counsel should have requested a specific written impeachment charge; omission prejudiced outcome | Trial court instructed on credibility and impeachment generally; counsel emphasized impeachment in closing; no reasonable probability of different result | No Strickland prejudice; omission not plain error — jury instructions taken as a whole were sufficient |
| Brady claim re: 911 recording | 911 call from Crankshaw contained exculpatory prior inconsistent statements and was suppressed by State | Defense knew the substance of the call; recording was public record/open-file and obtainable by diligence; call was not likely outcome-determinative given incriminating content and Propst’s confession | Brady claim fails: no suppression, defense aware/able to obtain recording, and no reasonable probability of a different outcome |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for review of sufficiency of the evidence)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (individual right to possess firearms for home defense)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (incorporation of Second Amendment against the states)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (prosecution’s duty to disclose favorable evidence)
- Taylor v. State, 297 Ga. 132 (corroboration of accomplice testimony may be slight/circumstantial)
- Chapman v. State, 275 Ga. 314 (venue can be established by circumstantial evidence; officers’ testimony re: jurisdiction)
- Reed v. State, 264 Ga. 466 (equal protection challenge framework; similarly situated/prongs of review)