Williams v. State
306 Ga. 674
Ga.2019Background
- On March 30, 2012, Antonio Felton and his cousin stopped at a convenience store; an argument erupted after Felton allegedly urinated on Williams’ and Hamilton’s vehicle.
- Felton left the lot in his car with his cousin Siedah Sanders; he continued arguing with Williams and Hamilton as he drove away.
- Williams shot multiple times at Felton’s car after Hamilton passed him a gun; a bullet struck Felton in the back of the head and killed him.
- A Bibb County grand jury indicted Williams (and co-defendant Hamilton) on multiple counts including malice murder, felony murder predicated on aggravated assault, two aggravated assaults, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
- A jury convicted Williams of malice murder, aggravated assault (Sanders), and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony; the felony-murder count was later vacated by operation of law.
- Williams appealed, challenging (1) sufficiency of the evidence for malice murder and (2) the trial court’s running the five-year firearm possession sentence consecutively to multiple other sentences.
Issues
| Issue | Williams’ Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for malice murder (implied or express malice) | Evidence insufficient to prove malice beyond reasonable doubt; provocation reduced offense to manslaughter | Evidence showed shooting an unarmed man driving away after minor provocation; supports implied malice | Conviction affirmed — evidence sufficient for malice murder (implied malice) |
| Whether provocation justified manslaughter instruction result | Williams argued he acted under sudden, violent, irresistible passion provoked by Felton | Jury reasonably rejected provocation claim; facts show no considerable provocation | Jury verdict stands; provocation not sufficient to negate malice |
| Sentencing: whether OCGA §16-11-106(b) required firearm sentence to run consecutively only to underlying felony sentence | Williams claimed firearm sentence improperly ran consecutively to both malice-murder and aggravated-assault sentences | State: merger of underlying felony left no separate underlying sentence; trial court had discretion to run firearm sentence consecutively or concurrently to other counts | Firearm sentence vacated and remanded for resentencing because trial court mistakenly believed it lacked discretion and parties so informed court |
| Remedy for sentencing error where court misunderstood sentencing discretion | Williams sought resentencing/reversal of consecutive running | State acknowledged discretion but argued outcome permissible; record showed court misunderstood its discretion | Court vacated firearm-possession sentence and remanded for resentencing; affirmed convictions otherwise |
Key Cases Cited
- Browder v. State, 294 Ga. 188 (proof of implied malice and jury’s role on provocation)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency review viewing evidence in light most favorable to the verdict)
- Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369 (operation-of-law vacatur of felony-murder when merged)
- Busch v. State, 271 Ga. 591 (construction of OCGA § 16-11-106(b) — firearm sentence must run consecutively to sentence for the underlying felony)
- Braithwaite v. State, 275 Ga. 884 (trial court’s discretion to run firearm sentence concurrent or consecutive to other counts)
- Blackledge v. State, 299 Ga. 385 (vacatur principles for merged convictions)
- Wilson v. State, 302 Ga. 106 (presumption that trial court understands and exercises lawful sentencing discretion)
- Ellington v. State, 292 Ga. 109 (error where trial court erroneously believes it lacks sentencing discretion)
- Johnson v. State, 302 Ga. 188 (presumption that trial court follows the law)
- Willis v. State, 304 Ga. 686 (noting disapproval of portions of prior precedent on other grounds)