Smith v. State, 292 Ga. 588

Smith was convicted of malice murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a weapon at a public gathering for a 2000 nightclub shooting that killed Lester.
The evidence showed a preceding club altercation, outside brawl, and Smith taking Stephens’s revolver during the fight.
Smith fired the revolver at Lester after being taunted; two shots fired, one fatal; Smith fled and the revolver was later disassembled and hidden.
Trial occurred September 2001; Smith was sentenced to life for malice murder and a concurrent sentence for weapons possession; other counts merged or vacated.
Smith moved for a new trial in 2001; amended motion in 2010; an out-of-time appeal was granted in 2011; the appeal was decided in 2013.
The court held judgments affirmed, with discussion on delays and due-process considerations, including appellate delay analysis.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	State argues evidence supported guilt beyond reasonable doubt.	Smith contends insufficiency of proof for the charged crimes.	Evidence authorized a reasonable doubt-free conviction.
Judge's comment about a witness's credibility	Smith claims OCGA 17-8-57 violation from court's remark about Davis being thorough.	State argues comments were permissible and limited to trial management.	No OCGA 17-8-57 violation; remark explained orderly presentation, not credibility.
Jury instruction on resolving conflicting testimony	Smith argues instruction impermissibly pressured belief without false-claim avoidance.	State asserts instruction properly directs weighing credibility, not a truthfulness presumption.	Charge was proper; did not shift burden or compel belief.
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Smith contends conflict of interest, inadequate cross-examination, and failure to object.	State argues no prejudice and no proven deficient performance.	No ineffective-assistance violation established.
Post-conviction appellate delay and due process	Smith claims inordinate appellate delay violated due process.	State applies Barker factors and finds no prejudice to defenses or appeal outcome.	No due-process violation from appellate delay; delay not prejudicial.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court 1979) (sufficiency review standard for criminal conviction)
Paslay v. State, 285 Ga. 616 (Ga. 2009) (OCGA 17-8-57 applicability to judge-counsel colloquies)
O’Hara v. State, 241 Ga. App. 855 (Ga. App. 2000) (brief judicial remarks may not improperly comment on credibility)
Adams v. State, 282 Ga. App. 819 (Ga. App. 2006) (trial-court control of proceedings; admissibility rulings explained)
Mitchell v. State, 275 Ga. 42 (Ga. 2002) (limits on comments regarding what has been proven)
Ridley v. State, 290 Ga. 798 (Ga. 2012) (trial court explanations of rulings not bolstering a witness)
Smith v. Francis, 253 Ga. 782 (Ga. 1985) (standard for assessing ineffective assistance in Georgia)
Jimmerson v. State, 289 Ga. 364 (Ga. 2011) (evidence of witness preparation and prejudice considerations)
Lawrence v. State, 286 Ga. 533 (Ga. 2010) (cross-examination and prejudice considerations)
Murphy v. State, 290 Ga. 459 (Ga. 2012) (commentary on witness credibility and admissibility)
John v. State, 282 Ga. 792 (Ga. 2007) (trial court explanations not constituting bolstering)
Pineda v. State, 288 Ga. 612 (Ga. 2011) (due-process considerations in appellate delay claims)
Browning v. State, 283 Ga. 528 (Ga. 2008) (four Barker factors in appellate-delay analysis)
Chatman v. Mandil, 280 Ga. 253 (Ga. 2006) (speedy-trial-factor framework for appellate-delay claims)
Ridley v. State, 290 Ga. 798 (Ga. 2012) (interpretation of trial-court rulings and credibility)