Smith v. State, 308 Ga. 81

Omari Smith and three co-defendants were tried for a February 14, 2010 shooting that killed T’Shanerka Smith; Smith was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault, and firearm possession and sentenced to life plus five years.
The prosecution presented eyewitness testimony (notably Priscilla Cofer) who identified Smith as one of the shooters, testimony that Smith and others were dropped off together shortly before the shooting, and circumstantial evidence (post-shooting appearance/behavior, phone records).
Co-defendants were tried jointly; one co-defendant (Cato) had a mistrial mid-trial and was retried later; Walter and Cato’s convictions were previously affirmed.
Post-trial, Smith moved for a new trial and alleged ineffective assistance; the court granted a limited remand for an ineffectiveness hearing, denied the motion, and Smith appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court.
Issues on appeal: sufficiency of the evidence; denial of severance; ineffective assistance for not objecting to the conflicts-in-testimony jury charge; denial of continuance for an alibi witness and related ineffective-assistance claim.

Issue	Smith's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence	Cofer’s ID was inconsistent; evidence weight showed it unlikely Smith was a shooter	Eyewitness ID plus corroborating circumstantial evidence supported guilt	Affirmed — evidence sufficient for rational jury to convict under Jackson v. Virginia
Motion to sever	Evidence against Smith weaker; defenses with Neloms were antagonistic/mutually exclusive	Defendants acted in concert; jury was instructed on parties to a crime and returned separate verdicts	Affirmed — denial of severance not an abuse of discretion
Ineffective assistance for failing to object to conflicts-in-testimony charge	Charge was misleading when defense presented no witnesses and effectively told jurors to "believe" prosecution witnesses	Charge was then-pattern instruction approved by Georgia precedent and not a Noggle-type presumption of truth; objection would be meritless	Affirmed — no deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland
Denial of continuance / failure to present alibi witness	Trial court abused discretion denying continuance to produce alibi witness; counsel failed to investigate/present alibi	Subpoena requirements not satisfied; counsel reasonably chose trial strategy to avoid weak/unfavorable alibi evidence	Affirmed — no abuse of discretion and no ineffective assistance (strategic decision plausible)

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency review)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance test)
Walter v. State, 304 Ga. 760 (2018) (summary of trial evidence and co-defendant appeal)
Mallory v. State, 271 Ga. 150 (1999) (conflicts-in-testimony charge held not erroneous)
Noggle v. State, 256 Ga. 383 (1986) (disapproved presumption-of-truth jury charge)
McClendon v. State, 299 Ga. 611 (2016) (denial of severance appropriate where defendants acted in concert and jury instructed properly)
Palmer v. State, 303 Ga. 810 (2018) (mere presence/antagonistic defenses insufficient to require severance)
Moss v. State, 298 Ga. 613 (2016) (calling witnesses is a strategic decision; not per se ineffective)
Smith v. State, 292 Ga. 588 (2013) (approved conflicts charge not a presumption-of-truth)
Rai v. State, 297 Ga. 472 (2015) (no error in following then-applicable pattern jury instruction)