Tye v. State, 298 Ga. 474

In 2008 Cortez Tye was convicted by a jury of two counts of felony murder, robbery, and aggravated assault arising from a 2006 carjacking in which the victim later died; he received concurrent life sentences on the felony-murder counts and concurrent 20-year terms on the other counts.
Six days before trial Tye’s counsel filed a special plea of incompetency and a motion for a competency evaluation under OCGA § 17-7-130; the trial court denied the motion as a delay tactic and the case proceeded to trial.
In 2012–2013 Tye’s post-conviction counsel sought a new trial based on the trial court’s refusal to hold a pretrial competency hearing and the parties agreed to proceed under the Baker v. State two‑prong retroactive competency framework.
At the Baker hearing the defense presented psychologist Dr. Adriana Flores, who opined Tye was incompetent (retrospectively and currently); the State presented psychiatrist Dr. Stacey Marks and other witnesses who testified Tye was competent; the superior court found the defense failed to prove incompetence by a preponderance.
Tye appealed only the competency ruling and the denial of a new trial; the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the competency finding but held the sentencing was partly erroneous because two felony-murder convictions/punishments for one death were improper, vacating the sentences and remanding for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Tye)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the superior court erred in crediting State expert over defense expert and finding Tye competent at trial	Dr. Flores’s credentials and testing supported retrospective incompetence; superior court should have credited her	Dr. Marks’s retrospective assessment and other evidence showed competency; factfinder entitled to weigh experts and credibility	Affirmed: court could rationally find Tye failed to prove incompetence by a preponderance
Whether competency could be determined retroactively under Baker	Court should not have applied Baker because no credible evidence of competency in 2008	Tye agreed to Baker and presented evidence; he waived challenge to the procedure	Affirmed: Tye conceded Baker procedure and cannot now complain; waiver applies
Whether equitable relief (state restoration program/new trial) was warranted despite Baker	Extraordinary equities and constitutional concerns justified ordering restoration and new trial	No meritorious basis to depart from Baker; Tye had urged that procedure	Denied: no basis to overturn Baker or order restoration/new trial
Whether sentences must be vacated because multiple felony-murder convictions for one death improperly subject defendant to multiple punishments	N/A (issue raised by Court)	N/A	Vacated: cannot be sentenced on two felony-murder counts for one killing; remand for resentencing on one felony-murder count and associated counts

Baker v. State, 250 Ga. 187 (1982) (establishes two‑prong test for retroactive competency hearings)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Slaughter v. State, 292 Ga. 573 (2013) (defendant bears burden to prove incompetence by preponderance; low IQ alone may not show incompetence)
Rhodes v. State, 279 Ga. 587 (2005) (prohibits multiple convictions/punishments for the same single criminal act resulting in one death)
Adams v. State, 275 Ga. 867 (2002) (defendant’s burden to prove incompetency by preponderance reiterated)
Velazquez v. State, 282 Ga. 871 (2008) (defines competency to stand trial—understanding proceedings and assisting counsel)
Crowe v. State, 277 Ga. 513 (2004) (trial court as factfinder determines credibility of expert witnesses)