State v. Sutton, 297 Ga. 222

Jerry Sutton was indicted for malice murder after he shot and killed his brother-in-law, William Anderson, during a dispute at their mother's apartment in July 2013.
Sutton received threatening voicemails the day before; a police officer who heard the messages believed Sutton was genuinely fearful for his safety and relayed the mother’s wish that Anderson not come to her home.
On the morning of the shooting, Anderson (apparently intoxicated) and others arrived at the mother’s apartment; Sutton was present with a handgun visible on a sofa, an argument ensued, and Anderson moved toward the doorway.
Sutton chambered a round, warned Anderson not to come closer, and then fired once when Anderson continued, killing him; no weapon was found on Anderson and toxicology showed cocaine in his system.
Sutton moved pretrial for immunity under OCGA § 16-3-24.2, asserting he was justified under the self-defense statute OCGA § 16-3-21; the trial court held a hearing, found Sutton proved self-defense by a preponderance, and dismissed the indictment.
The State appealed; the Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the trial court’s factual findings for any supporting evidence and affirmed the dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Sutton)	Held
Whether Sutton met his burden to establish immunity under OCGA § 16-3-24.2 by proving justification under OCGA § 16-3-21	The State argued the evidence did not show Sutton reasonably believed deadly force was necessary	Sutton argued he reasonably believed deadly force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or his mother	Court held Sutton met the preponderance standard; trial court’s factual findings supported immunity and indictment dismissal
Whether self-defense/immunity determinations must be decided pretrial rather than by a jury	The State argued self-defense is a jury question and the trial court erred in deciding it pretrial	Sutton argued an immunity motion requires a pretrial judicial determination under OCGA § 16-3-24.2	Court held prior precedent requires a pretrial ruling on immunity and declined to overrule those cases; trial court correctly decided the issue pretrial
Whether particular factual findings (e.g., bullet trajectory; Sutton’s knowledge of Anderson’s prior violence) were supported by evidence	The State contended the trial court’s findings lacked evidentiary support	Sutton relied on autopsy report and his recorded statement to the GBI (played at hearing) to support the findings	Court held the autopsy and Sutton’s recorded statement (even if not transcribed) provided some evidence to support the trial court’s findings; findings accepted

Sifuentes v. State, 293 Ga. 441 (defines burden — defendant must prove justification by preponderance)
Hipp v. State, 293 Ga. 415 (appellate review accepts trial court fact/credibility findings if any evidence supports them)
Bunn v. State, 284 Ga. 410 (trial court must decide immunity under § 16-3-24.2 pretrial)
Fair v. State, 284 Ga. 165 (same principle; supports pretrial immunity determination)
Jenkins v. Edelhertz, 272 Ga. 480 (when a hearing transcript/recording is not in the appellate record, trial court findings based on it are presumed correct)
Rodriguez v. State, 295 Ga. 362 (same presumption where recorded evidence was before the trial court but not in the appellate record)