State v. Owens
296 Ga. 205
Ga.2014Background
- On June 1, 2011, an eleven-month-old infant died after being left in Maria Owens’s care; autopsy found blunt-force trauma and a fresh lower-back fracture; medical examiner ruled homicide.
- Fulton County indicted Owens on malice murder, two counts of felony murder (aggravated assault and cruelty to a child), aggravated assault, and first-degree child cruelty; trial occurred in Sept.–Oct. 2013.
- The trial court, at defense request and without State objection, charged lesser included offenses including felony involuntary manslaughter (OCGA § 16‑5‑3(a)) with possible predicates of simple battery (intent) or reckless conduct (criminal negligence).
- The jury acquitted on malice murder, convicted Owens of both felony murder counts, aggravated assault, first‑degree child cruelty, and also convicted on felony involuntary manslaughter; the verdict form did not specify which predicate supported the involuntary manslaughter verdict.
- Trial court sentenced Owens to ten years on felony involuntary manslaughter and merged the other convictions into the malice murder count; the State appealed.
- The Supreme Court of Georgia found the jury returned mutually exclusive verdicts and held the appropriate remedy is reversal and remand for a new trial; the involuntary manslaughter judgment and felony murder verdicts were set aside.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Owens) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State may appeal the judgment | State: Appeal authorized because the judgment is void for resting on mutually exclusive verdicts (OCGA § 5‑7‑1(a)(6)) | Owens: State lacks appeal right; Court lacks jurisdiction | Court: State may appeal under OCGA § 5‑7‑1(a)(6); Court has jurisdiction |
| Whether the felony murder and felony involuntary manslaughter verdicts are mutually exclusive | State: Verdicts reconcilable; appellate speculation can harmonize them (citing Jackson and Drake) | Owens: Verdicts mutually exclusive because involuntary manslaughter could have been predicated on reckless conduct (negligence) while felony murder required intent | Court: Verdicts were mutually exclusive because the verdict form didn’t specify the manslaughter predicate, creating a reasonable possibility it was based on reckless conduct |
| Whether sentencing on the lesser included involuntary manslaughter (and merging felonies) cures the defect | State: Court should sentence on felony murder and set aside the lesser | Owens: Trial court properly sentenced on the lesser included offense | Court: Remedy insufficient; appellate courts cannot speculate about jury findings — judgment void; reverse and remand for new trial |
| Proper remedy for mutually exclusive verdicts | State: Impliedly prefers resolving in favor of greater offenses | Owens: Affirm sentence on lesser | Court: Reverse, set aside conflicting verdicts, remand for new trial (not resentencing or piecemeal correction) |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes sufficiency-of-the-evidence standard)
- Jackson v. State, 276 Ga. 408 (discusses when felony murder and involuntary manslaughter may be reconcilable)
- Allaben v. State, 294 Ga. 315 (judgment based on mutually exclusive verdicts is void)
- Drake v. State, 288 Ga. 131 (illustrates reconciling ostensibly inconsistent verdicts in particular factual posture)
- Flores v. State, 277 Ga. 780 (mutually exclusive verdicts reversed and remanded)
- Walker v. State, 293 Ga. 709 (remedy for inconsistent/mutually exclusive verdicts)
- Milanovich v. United States, 365 U.S. 551 (appellate courts should not speculate to reconcile inconsistent verdicts)