Rush v. State, 294 Ga. 388

Cogburn, a marijuana dealer, obtained drugs from Big and planned to sell to Taylor; Cogburn followed Taylor and Taylor’s friend (appellant) back to Taylor’s trap in an apartment leased to appellant.
Cogburn informed his girlfriend Gagne of the drug deal, its participants, and his movements via calls and texts; he later contacted Gagne in fear that he was being set up.
Cogburn was shot while leaving the trap; his body was found in the doorway of appellant’s apartment; neighbor Williams saw the body and noted appellant and Taylor fleeing.
Phone records showed appellant’s cell phone pinging near the murder scene at the time; appellant claimed Savannah alibi but contradicted by records and testimony.
Gagne testified that Cogburn said “they”—referring to Taylor and his close friend—thought Cogburn set them up, supporting an inference of appellant’s participation in the drug deal and murder.
Appellant was present at the apartment during the shooting, fled with Taylor, and later gave inconsistent statements to police about his whereabouts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there sufficient evidence to convict Rush as a party to the crimes?	Rush	Rush	Yes; evidence supported reasoning that Rush aided or participated.
Was trial counsel ineffective for failing to object to prosecutor’s flight-related remark?	Rush	Rush	No; remark permissible as inference from evidence; no deficient performance.
Was trial counsel ineffective for objections to statements implying counsel’s lack of zeal for truth?	Rush	Rush	No; comments within closing argument discretion to highlight inconsistencies; no deficient performance.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency standard for criminal evidence)
Sanders v. State, 290 Ga. 637 (2012) (no comment on silence; but flight evidence admissible)
Reynolds v. State, 285 Ga. 70 (2009) (limits on comment on silence; evidence of flight)
White v. State, 281 Ga. 276 (2006) (standard for ineffective assistance claims)
Sifuentes v. State, 293 Ga. 441 (2013) (Strickland prejudice and deficiency framework)
Evans v. State, 288 Ga. 571 (2011) (admissibility of flight-related evidence)
Appling v. State, 281 Ga. 590 (2006) (proper use of inconsistencies in closing argument)
Thornton v. State, 292 Ga. 87 (2012) (presence and conduct before/after offense may infer participation)
Curinton v. State, 283 Ga. 226 (2008) (presence and conduct as circumstantial proof of participation)
Scott v. State, 305 Ga. App. 710 (2010) (prosecutor’s closing remarks and direction regarding defendant’s statements)