Williams v. State
290 Ga. 533
| Ga. | 2012Background
- Appellant Jarnard Williams and co-defendant Mitchell were indicted for felony murder, aggravated assault, and firearm counts; Williams separately indicted for theft by receiving a Toyota Highlander.
- At trial, witnesses placed Williams and Mitchell near the scene of a shooting that killed Baker and wounded Robinson; two guns were recovered nearby.
- Detective interviewed Venus McKinney, who claimed Williams had a 9mm and was with him the night before the crimes, but she later recanted at trial.
- Jamel Williams testified about a drug deal involving Williams and Mitchell in a black SUV; pre-trial statements allegedly placed Williams with a Tech-9 and Appellant with a 9mm.
- Borrum testified inconsistently about involvement; he admitted being with Appellant at times but denied recognizing the Highlander.
- Fitzgerald identified Mitchell as a shooter but had difficulty identifying the second shooter; subsequent lineups identified Appellant weeks later.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Fitzgerald’s December 20 lineup identification unduly suggestive and effective assistance deficient? | Williams | Williams | No; lineup not unduly suggestive; no deficiency shown |
| Did trial counsel’s failure to call Sterling and Sheila Williams as witnesses effect a different outcome? | Williams | Williams | No reasonable probability of different result |
| Was trial counsel ineffective for failing to object to or request charges on single-witness and criminal-party testimony? | Williams | Williams | No reversible error; charges supported by evidence and could be given sua sponte |
| Was trial counsel ineffective for failing to object to and move to exclude testimony about Borrum’s threat and closing argument tying Appellant to it? | Williams | Williams | Evidence admissible to explain credibility; closing argument issue waived; even if raised, not reversible |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Perry v. New Hampshire, 132 S. Ct. 716 (2012) (eyewitness identification reliability framework)
- Biggs v. State, 281 Ga. 627 (2007) (strong showing required to suppress identification)
- Williams v. State, 286 Ga. 884 (2010) (lineup identifications not unduly suggestive in given context)
- Arrington v. State, 286 Ga. 335 (2009) (prosecution broad latitude in argument)
- Coleman v. State, 278 Ga. 486 (2004) (admissibility of witness-threat evidence to explain reluctance)
- Doodles v. United States, 539 F.3d 1291 (10th Cir. 2008) (witness credibility and fear evidence proper)
- Kell v. State, 280 Ga. 669 (2006) (limits on admission of fear/retaliation evidence)
- Gagnon v. State, 240 Ga. App. 754 (1999) (sua sponte charges permissible when supported by evidence)
- Carter v. United States, 410 F.3d 942 (7th Cir. 2005) (time gap reduces influence of earlier identifications)
- Daily v. United States, 488 F.3d 796 (8th Cir. 2007) (second lineup not inherently unduly suggestive when identical)