Tepanca v. State
297 Ga. 47
| Ga. | 2015Background
- In April 2008 Hugo M. Tepanca shot and killed Jose Sanchez‑Vargas after seeing him speaking with Tepanca’s secret girlfriend; victim was unarmed and was shot multiple times. Tepanca admitted shooting but claimed fear and that he intended only to “make things right.”
- Tepanca was indicted for malice murder, felony murder (predicated on aggravated assault), aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during commission of a felony; jury convicted on all counts. Trial court sentenced life for felony murder and five years for the firearms offense, merging convictions for sentencing.
- On appeal Tepanca raised multiple claims: (1) the trial court erred in merging malice into felony murder; (2) verdicts were mutually exclusive/inconsistent because jury convicted of malice murder but acquitted of voluntary manslaughter; (3) trial court erred by refusing jury instructions on adultery/sexual jealousy provocation and mutual combat; and (4) ineffective assistance by first appellate counsel (abandonment at the motion for new trial stage).
- The Court reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence under Jackson v. Virginia and found the facts supported the convictions.
- The Court rejected each of Tepanca’s arguments: it found no reversible error in the merger of convictions, held that inconsistent verdict rule is abolished and there was no mutually exclusive verdict problem, found no basis for the requested provocation or mutual combat instructions on the evidence, and found the ineffective‑assistance claim too conclusory to warrant remand or relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Tepanca) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Merger of malice and felony murder at sentencing | Trial court erred by vacating malice and retaining felony murder | Felony murder stands; malice is surplusage where both returned and life sentence appropriate | No reversible error; malice properly vacated and appellant not harmed |
| Guilty of malice murder but acquitted of voluntary manslaughter — mutually exclusive/inconsistent verdicts | Verdicts are mutually exclusive or inconsistent and thus void | Rule against mutually exclusive verdicts inapplicable; inconsistent‑verdict rule abolished in criminal cases | Rejected; verdicts not mutually exclusive and inconsistent‑verdict doctrine does not require reversal |
| Failure to charge adultery or sexual jealousy as provocation for voluntary manslaughter | Jury should have been instructed that adultery/sexual jealousy may be provocation | No adultery (parties unmarried); Tepanca’s testimony negated sexual‑jealous provocation theory | No instruction warranted on facts; claim fails |
| Failure to charge mutual combat | Mutual combat instruction was required to downgrade to voluntary manslaughter | Tepanca testified he did not want to fight; no mutual intent to fight shown | No mutual combat instruction required; trial court did not err |
| Ineffective assistance by first appellate counsel (motion for new trial abandonment) | Appellate counsel abandoned the case at new‑trial stage and delayed appeal; Cronic applies so prejudice presumed | Counsel’s alleged failures not complete or per Cronic; claim is conclusory and lacks specifics to meet Strickland | Cronic inapplicable; claim evaluated under Strickland and denied — appellant failed to show deficient performance or prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (sufficiency of the evidence standard for upholding convictions)
- United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 (explaining mutually exclusive verdict concept and verdict reconciliation)
- Milam v. State, 255 Ga. 560 (abolition of inconsistent‑verdict rule in Georgia criminal cases)
- Cronic v. United States, 466 U.S. 648 (constructive denial of counsel standard requiring complete absence of counsel)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Shepherd v. State, 280 Ga. 245 (distinguishing mutually exclusive verdicts from combinations of guilty and not guilty verdicts)
- Wade v. State, 258 Ga. 324 (vacating malice conviction as surplusage when felony murder also returned)