Sanders v. State, 290 Ga. 445

Sanders was convicted of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and firearm possession in a drive-by shooting that killed Demetrius Pearson.
Baker, the only eyewitness identifying Sanders, testified about the shooter in a gold Suburban, wearing a lime green shirt and gold sunglasses, seen under streetlight and gun flashes.
The medical examiner attributed Pearson's death to a gunshot wound to the chest; the evidence viewed most favorably supports guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sanders challenged the trial court for limiting cross-examination of Baker about his first-offender pleas to show bias; the Fulton County plea and subsequent Clayton County plea were implicated.
The trial court refused to allow cross-examination about the Fulton County first-offender plea; it allowed examination regarding bias only if supported by evidence connecting pleas to bias.
The State elicited hearsay suggesting retaliation for a fake drug deal; the court sustained objections, struck the testimony, gave a curative instruction, and denied a mistrial (motion not renewed).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May cross-exam allow bias via first offender pleas?	Sanders argues Baker’s first offender pleas show bias.	State contends limited cross-exam is proper and Fulton County plea was not admissible for bias.	Trial court properly limited cross-examination; no abuse.
Was denial of mistrial due to hearsay error reversible?	Sanders asserts mistrial warranted due to improper character evidence.	State argues curative measures sufficed; no need for mistrial.	No error; curative instruction preserved fairness.
Did failure to renew mistrial after curative instruction prejudice Sanders?	Renewal of mistrial could have secured reversal if prejudice persisted.	No prejudice shown; curative instruction adequate.	No ineffective assistance; renewal would not have changed outcome.
Was cross-examination about Baker’s drug-dealing credibility properly limited as cumulative?	Cross-examination regarding drug dealing was essential impeachment.	Limitation was permissible to avoid cumulative impeachment.	Limitation proper; cumulative impeachment beyond scope.
Was the Allen charge coercive in light of the deliberations?	Challenged post-deliberation coercion.	Charge given in line with pattern instruction; no coercion.	Allen charge not coercive; verdict not tainted.

Matthews v. State, 268 Ga. 798 (1997) (first-offender status cannot impeach for general credibility)
Davis v. State, 269 Ga. 276 (1998) (first offender status cannot be used to impeach where not guilt adjudication)
Smith v. State, 276 Ga. 263 (2003) (Confrontation Clause permits bias-based cross-examination of first offender status)
White v. State, 268 Ga. 28 (1997) (mistrial appropriate only if essential to fair trial; curative measures often sufficient)
Rafi v. State, 289 Ga. 716 (2011) (no error denying mistrial when curative instruction given)