Smith v. State
298 Ga. 406
| Ga. | 2016Background
- On Dec. 29, 2007, Russell Roland was fatally shot and Victor Powell injured during an armed robbery; Christopher Smith ("Appellant") was later arrested and tried twice (first trial hung; second trial Jan. 2011 resulted in convictions).
- Jury convicted Smith of malice murder, three counts of felony murder, armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime; trial court sentenced for malice murder, aggravated assault (Powell), and possession during commission of a crime.
- Evidence at the second trial included eyewitness identifications (Shawnell Johnson identified Smith at trial and in a photo lineup; Powell gave descriptive identifications), police testimony tying nickname "Lil’/Little Chris" and a black Monte Carlo to Smith, and drugs/scales found at Smith’s residence.
- Post-trial, Smith argued the trial court violated his right to be present when a prospective juror (Juror #33) was removed while he was briefly absent, and he asserted multiple ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims.
- Trial court denied Smith’s amended motion for new trial; on appeal the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed convictions but vacated part of sentencing and remanded for resentencing on two counts that should not have been merged.
Issues
| Issue | Smith's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to be present when juror #33 was removed | Removal occurred while Smith briefly left the courtroom; his right to be present was violated | Smith effectively acquiesced because the removal and reasons were discussed with him later and he never objected | No reversible error — Smith acquiesced; presence right waived by his silence and later confirmations |
| Ineffective assistance — cross-examination of Johnson (ID) | Counsel failed to press Johnson on basis of identification, which would have undermined her ID | Counsel reasonably pursued other impeachment strategies; further questioning might not help and could harm Smith | No deficiency or prejudice shown; tactical choice within wide deference to counsel |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to object to Detective Redlinger testimony (lineups, nickname, other Chrises) | Counsel should have corrected or objected to misleading or hearsay/Confrontation Clause testimony | Testimony was not misleading or was permissible (investigative summary, not testimonial hearsay); strategic choice not to object was reasonable; no prejudice | No ineffective assistance — testimony permissible or harmless and counsel’s choices not patently unreasonable |
| Sentencing/merger error | Trial court merged several counts into felony-murder counts and failed to sentence on some counts after felony-murder counts vacated | Court’s merger partly correct but some non-merged counts required sentencing | Affirmed convictions; vacated part of judgment and remanded for sentencing on armed robbery and possession-by-convicted-felon counts (which did not merge into malice murder) |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance: deficiency and prejudice)
- Zamora v. State, 291 Ga. 512 (2012) (defendant’s right to be present at jury-selection changes; acquiescence doctrine)
- Ward v. State, 288 Ga. 641 (2011) (acquiescence in waiver when defendant remains silent after counsel’s waiver)
- Hulett v. State, 296 Ga. 49 (2014) (merger and sentencing principles where felony-murder counts are vacated)
- Hampton v. State, 282 Ga. 490 (2007) (defendant’s right to be present at critical trial stages)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (prejudice standard under Strickland requires reasonable probability to undermine confidence in outcome)