Redding v. State, 293 Ga. 766

Appellant Jonathan Redding was convicted after a jury trial for felony murder, participation in a criminal street gang, multiple armed robberies, aggravated assaults, burglaries, false imprisonment, and firearm-possession enhancements arising from a series of gang-related robberies in Atlanta (Dec 2008–Jan 2009).
Key facts: Redding was a member of “30 Deep/Da Robbing Crew”; he allegedly brandished and fired a stolen 9mm during a robbery at The Standard (Dec 21, 2008); on Jan 7, 2009 the same 9mm and a Glock were used in a robbery at The Standard that resulted in John Henderson’s death; ballistic and DNA evidence linked Redding to the shootings and the 9mm recovered after he was wounded during a Jan 9, 2009 attempted robbery.
Redding was indicted on 24 counts; the jury convicted on numerous counts (some counts later merged), and the trial court imposed life for felony murder plus additional terms. Trial court granted directed acquittal on six counts.
On appeal Redding challenged certain jury instructions: (1) that the felony-murder instruction included parenthetical language referencing malice (which was not charged), and (2) that the court’s explanation of verdict forms may have unduly emphasized the guilty option when grouping counts by date.
The Georgia Supreme Court reviewed the instructions as a whole, applied harmless-error and cure doctrines, and affirmed the convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jury included parenthetical reference to malice in felony-murder instruction and mentioned malice aforethought	Redding: references to malice confused the jury because he was not charged with malice murder	State: instruction still tracked felony-murder law; harmless because jury received indictment and burden-of-proof instructions; any reference favored defendant	Court: Error to include malice language, but not reversible. Instruction cured by indictment and burden instructions; any error favored defendant and was harmless
Court’s verdict-form instruction grouped counts by date and did not repeat “not guilty” option for each group	Redding: grouping without repeating acquit language unduly emphasized guilty option and could pressure guilty verdicts	State: overall charge made clear jury must decide each count separately and must write "not guilty" if reasonable doubt exists	Court: No undue emphasis. Read as whole, jury was properly instructed to consider and decide each count separately and acquit where reasonable doubt existed

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence review)
Sharpe v. State, 291 Ga. 148 (2012) (instructional error cured where jury was given indictment and burden-of-proof instruction)
Davis v. State, 290 Ga. 757 (2012) (court reviews jury charges as a whole to determine fairness)
Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (2009) (jury resolves witness credibility and evidentiary conflicts)
Sanders v. State, 283 Ga. 372 (2008) (instructional error that benefits defendant is not reversible)
Brown v. State, 250 Ga. 66 (1982) (erroneous charge that benefits defendant is harmless)