Ragan v. State, 299 Ga. 828

Lonnie Ragan was convicted after a jury trial for malice murder, related aggravated assaults, and firearm offenses for shooting and killing Holly Hearn and injuring others; sentenced to life without parole plus consecutive terms totaling 50 years.
Evidence at trial: Ragan, a convicted felon, armed with a shotgun, threatened others while searching for his estranged wife/child, confronted the Hearns, and shot Holly (who emerged armed with a revolver) and injured Ryan; Ragan later called 911 and admitted the shooting.
Defense theory: Ragan acted in self-defense and suffered from mental-health conditions (testified to by Dr. Catherine Boyer) that distorted his perception of threat; Dr. Boyer did not claim insanity or incompetence.
Trial events at issue on appeal: (1) a prosecutor’s cross‑examination question implying Ragan “reportedly requested an attorney” after the shooting (unanswered), and (2) admission of five in-life photographs of the victim identified by her husband and an alleged emotional reaction in the courtroom prompting a mistrial motion.
The trial court instructed the jury to disregard the prosecutor’s question, admitted the five photographs, denied Ragan’s mistrial motions, and Ragan appealed. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Ragan)	Held
Whether prosecutor’s question implying post-arrest request for counsel required a mistrial under Doyle/Wainwright	The question was an inadvertent, isolated reference and harmless given curative instruction and lack of emphasis thereafter	The question improperly commented on invocation of counsel/ silence and prejudiced Ragan, entitling him to a mistrial	No mistrial; error (if any) was harmless in context of strong evidence, curative instruction, and no further emphasis
Admissibility of five victim-while-in-life photographs identified by the husband	Photos were probative to show victim’s identity and family status	Photos were cumulative and unduly prejudicial; identification by a family member increased emotional impact and should've been excluded under OCGA § 24-4-403	Admission was error (probative value outweighed by prejudice), but error was harmless given overwhelming guilt evidence and independent proof of identity
Whether a mistrial was required because photographs elicited crying/emotional jury response	Emotional reaction was not shown to be prejudicial enough; motion was untimely and trial court's discretion governs	Courtroom emotion from photographs unfairly influenced jury and warranted mistrial	Denial of mistrial affirmed: motion untimely, record lacks detail on prejudicial effect, and trial court did not abuse discretion

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (prosecutorial comment on post‑arrest silence violates due process)
Wainwright v. Greenfield, 474 U.S. 284 (invocation of right to counsel also protected from prosecution’s comment)
United States v. Reeves, 742 F.3d 487 (11th Cir.) (isolated reference to invocation of rights may be harmless if not stressed)
United States v. Miller, 255 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir.) (harmless‑error standard for constitutional errors)
Brewer v. Hall, 278 Ga. 511 (harmless‑error framework for Doyle violations under Georgia law)
Hood v. State, 299 Ga. 95 (Rule 403 purpose: exclude evidence of scant probative value dragged in for prejudice)
Sizemore v. State, 251 Ga. 867 (victim‑while‑in‑life photographs may be relevant to corpus delicti/identity)
Boyd v. State, 284 Ga. 46 (prefer victim photographs showing only the victim; limit family identification)
Flowers v. State, 275 Ga. 592 (better practice to have nonrelated witness identify victim to limit prejudice)
Ottis v. State, 271 Ga. 200 (trial court discretion on mistrial motions)