Tanner v. State
301 Ga. 852
| Ga. | 2017Background
- On June 5, 2014 Cedric Huff was shot outside his apartment and later died; police found signs of a struggle and several pounds of marijuana in his home.
- Huff spoke with his mother while hospitalized and, when lucid, identified Leshan Tanner and someone called “Little Monster” as the people who robbed him; Huff earlier had been evasive with police.
- Tanner had contact with Huff by phone shortly before the shooting, had communications with co-defendant Rodnie Stokes, and changed his account between two police interviews; Tanner’s phone and a white truck matching a witness description were found concealed after the shooting.
- Stokes pleaded guilty to related offenses and provided a proffer implicating Tanner; Stokes’s testimony was available but not called at Tanner’s trial.
- Tanner was convicted by a jury of felony murder (based on conspiracy to commit robbery), conspiracy to commit robbery, and attempt to purchase marijuana; he appealed, challenging admission of Huff’s statements, Confrontation Clause, sufficiency of the evidence, and sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Tanner) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility under OCGA § 24-8-807 (residual hearsay) | Huff’s statements to his mother met exceptional guarantees of trustworthiness, were more probative than other evidence, and necessary. | Statements lacked sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness and were less probative than available eyewitness (Stokes) testimony. | Trial court did not abuse its discretion; statements admitted under Rule 807. |
| Confrontation Clause (testimonial hearsay) | Statements to a distraught mother were non‑testimonial; primary purpose was familial, not to create prosecutorial evidence. | Mother acted as police agent by cooperating with investigation, making statements testimonial and inadmissible without cross‑examination. | Statements were non‑testimonial; admission did not violate Crawford. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for conspiracy to commit robbery and felony murder | Combined evidence (Huff’s ID, phone records, deleted texts, struggle, postcrime concealment, Stokes proffer) supported conviction beyond reasonable doubt. | Evidence was largely circumstantial and thin; could be equally possible Tanner was unaware of Stokes’s intent—convictions therefore unsupported. | Evidence was sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia; convictions affirmed on merits. |
| Sentencing / merger of convictions | State concedes conspiracy to commit robbery merges into felony murder predicated on that conspiracy; concurrent sentence error should be corrected. | (Not raised by Tanner on appeal) | Sentence on conspiracy count vacated because conspiracy merges into felony murder. |
Key Cases Cited
- Smart v. State, 299 Ga. 414 (discussing narrow, rare application of Rule 807 and required guarantees of trustworthiness)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (testimonial hearsay and Confrontation Clause standard)
- Favors v. State, 296 Ga. 842 (primary‑purpose test for testimonial statements)
- Rivers v. United States, 777 F.3d 1306 (abuse of discretion review for Rule 807 admission)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Harrington v. State, 300 Ga. 574 (analysis of circumstantial evidence and accomplice knowledge)
- Smith v. State, 297 Ga. 667 (merger and sentencing principles affirmed)