Styles v. State
309 Ga. 463
| Ga. | 2020Background
- On July 25, 2009, Alberto Lumens was shot dead and $5,000 taken from his home; Juan Lumens Garcia was robbed and struck; three accomplices (Essie Hollis, Cornell Stephens, Lamar Jones) later pleaded guilty to robbery and testified for the State.
- Hollis, Stephens, and Jones testified that Derrick Styles planned and entered the house with a gun, that Styles (Michael) was involved in planning and acted as the getaway driver, and that the group discussed stealing money found in the house.
- Police recovered .380 bullets and shell casings from the scene, a photograph from Lumens’ home in Derrick’s car, surveillance video from a gas station showing the group together, and recorded phone calls between Hollis and Michael Styles after the crimes.
- Michael Styles and his brother Derrick were jointly tried, convicted of burglary, felony murder (predicated on armed robbery), armed robbery, and related firearms counts; Michael received consecutive lengthy prison sentences.
- Michael appealed, raising sufficiency of the evidence, refusal to charge a lesser included offense, handling of a jury note, prosecutor’s closing-argument remarks, and ineffective assistance of counsel; the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that Michael participated | Accomplice testimony is uncorroborated and insufficient | Three accomplices corroborate each other; independent evidence (video, phone calls, physical evidence) ties Michael to the crimes | Evidence sufficient; conviction affirmed (Jackson standard) |
| Refusal to charge lesser included offense (robbery vs. armed robbery) | Michael requested a robbery charge as lesser included | Uncontradicted evidence shows completion only of armed robbery; lesser not authorized by evidence | No plain error; trial court properly refused the lesser-charge instruction |
| Handling jury communication (Lowery requirements) | Court failed to mark jury note as exhibit and denied full counsel opportunity to respond | Court filed the note, informed counsel of proposed recharge outside jury, counsel had opportunity and made no specific objection; no prejudice | Even assuming partial noncompliance, no harm shown; no reversible error |
| Prosecutor’s alleged improper personal opinion in closing | Prosecutor vouched for witness credibility and called defendants "devils," improperly expressing belief | Defense used same "devil" rhetoric; prosecutor rebutted defense attack and argued permissible inferences; no objection at trial | Waived by failure to object; alternatively not reversible as permissible rebuttal argument |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (investigation / failure to seek severance) | Counsel failed to investigate/prepare and should have moved to sever from Derrick | Counsel had 30+ years’ experience, reviewed discovery, investigated, met client, made strategic choice to try jointly and shift blame; severance would not necessarily help | No deficient performance or prejudice shown; Strickland claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance-of-counsel test)
- Lowery v. State, 282 Ga. 68 (requirements for handling juror communications)
- Taylor v. State, 297 Ga. 132 (corroboration requirement for accomplice testimony)
- Rogers v. State, 289 Ga. 675 (lesser-included charge must be given if evidence supports it)
- Jenkins v. State, 270 Ga. 607 (when evidence establishes only greater offense, lesser charge unnecessary)
- Scott v. State, 290 Ga. 883 (waiver of closing-argument objections; prosecutor latitude)