314 Ga. 534
Ga.2022Background
- On March 15, 2010 Antwan Curry was shot and later died; Fulton County indicted Jaquavious Reed and Santron Prickett for malice murder, felony murder (predicated on aggravated assault), aggravated assault, and a weapons count. Reed and Prickett were tried jointly in May 2011.
- Key eyewitnesses (Willie Wilson, Harriet Feggins, Keon Burns, Lakeyta Smith) testified that after Prickett and Curry tussled and Prickett fled, Reed approached and shot Curry; medical testimony identified a fatal wound to the shoulder. Reed denied presence at the scene.
- Jury convicted Reed on all counts; he received life sentences for malice and felony murder and a consecutive five-year weapons term. Trial counsel later moved for new trial; motions and a hearing occurred years after conviction (motion denied Oct. 21, 2021). Appeal argued April 21, 2022.
- Post-trial disputes focused on: sufficiency of the evidence; lengthy appellate delay; 25–26 untranscribed bench conferences and Reed’s absence from them; alleged DA office conflict because an earlier appointed attorney took a DA job; missing transcript portions; alleged Brady material (Crime Stoppers payments); denial of continuance for a late State witness (Feggins); ineffective assistance claims; and sentencing both on malice and felony murder.
- Court affirmed convictions except it vacated the felony-murder conviction (trial court had erred in sentencing both murder counts) and remanded for resentencing on the weapons count concurrency/consecutivity issue.
Issues
| Issue | Reed's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Conviction rests on two inconsistent/unreliable witnesses (Wilson, Feggins); testimony was weak | Jury credited witnesses; other testimony (Burns) corroborated Reed’s role | Evidence sufficient; judgment as to guilt affirmed (Jackson standard applies) |
| Appellate delay / speedy appeal | >10-year delay prejudiced appeal by fading memories and impaired ability to litigate issues | Reed failed to show actual prejudice from delay; bare assertions insufficient | No due-process violation; Reed did not prove requisite prejudice |
| Right to be present at bench conferences (untranscribed) | Reed absent from ~26 bench conferences; absence violated right to be present | Conferences were logistical/legal; defendant acquiesced/waived presence; trial court could infer subject from transcript context | No violation; Reed waived/acquiesced and did not show particularized prejudice |
| Missing transcript (bench conferences) | State failed to preserve full transcript, harming Reed’s ability to appeal | Trial court reconstructed subjects from surrounding record; no prejudice shown | No due-process violation; Reed failed to show prejudice from missing portions |
| Brady (Crime Stoppers payments) | State suppressed exculpatory evidence about payments to witnesses which would impeach them | Crime Stoppers is independent; no evidence State possessed or suppressed payment records | Brady claim fails: Reed did not show State had or suppressed favorable evidence |
| Denial of continuance for late State witness (Feggins) | Feggins was a surprise witness; defense was ambushed and needed time to investigate | State learned of witness via co-defendant’s counsel; court gave time to interview and provided records; no discovery violation shown | Trial court did not abuse discretion denying continuance; defense had opportunity to interview and no prejudice shown |
| Conflict of interest / disqualify DA’s office | Former PD attorney (Chase) who briefly entered appearance later took DA job; DA should be disqualified | Chase had little/no involvement after leaving PD; defense counsel knew and raised no timely objection | Issue waived for appeal because Reed did not raise it promptly at trial; no timely disqualification request |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Trial counsel failed to object to absence at bench conferences, failed to ensure full transcript, and failed to object to jury "presumption of truthfulness" charge | Either objections would have been meritless or Reed cannot show prejudice under Strickland | IAC claims fail: no demonstrable prejudice; objections to the jury charge would have been meritless under controlling precedent at trial |
| Sentencing both malice and felony murder | Impermissible duplicate sentencing for the same homicide | State agreed trial court erred by imposing both sentences | Felony-murder conviction vacated; case remanded for resentencing consistent with Lucky v. State |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutional standard for sufficiency review)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (Brady suppression rule for exculpatory evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong ineffective assistance standard)
- Lucky v. State, 286 Ga. 478 (Ga. 2010) (when jury convicts of both malice and felony murder for same death, sentence only on malice murder)
- Champ v. State, 310 Ga. 832 (Ga. 2021) (right to be present does not extend to bench conferences that are purely legal or logistical)
- Nesby v. State, 310 Ga. 757 (Ga. 2021) (limitations on right to be present at bench conferences; burden to show conference implicated right)
- Mallory v. State, 271 Ga. 150 (Ga. 1999) (pattern jury charge reconciling conflicting testimony is not a disapproved presumption-of-truthfulness charge)