Williamson v. State
308 Ga. App. 473
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Williamson appealed the denial of his motion for new trial after a jury convicted him of armed robbery, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and gun charges.
- Trial evidence shows a 2006 drug deal setup involving three men in a Cadillac and a Mustang, with Cannon as a co-defendant and witness.
- Cannon testified as a hostile witness; he admitted involvement in the drugs and Mustang scene but claimed Williamson was in the Mustang during the shooting only in some accounts.
- Toney and Priest identified Williamson as the Mustang driver in the events leading to Buchanan’s shooting and death, though lineup identifications were imperfect.
- Neighbors and other witnesses described the robbery and shooting; physical evidence included a red box and a counterfeit-looking marijuana substitute.
- The trial court allowed Cannon to testify as a hostile witness after a guilty plea by Cannon and allowed testimony by Cannon’s wife and other witnesses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of corroboration for accomplice testimony | Cannon's testimony alone insufficient; lacked corroboration. | Any corroboration suffices; slight corroboration allowed. | Sufficient corroboration existed to sustain conviction |
| Did the trial court err in denying the requested corroboration charge | Charge should have instructed identity corroboration beyond accomplice. | Pattern charge already covered corroboration law; no error. | No reversible error; charge given adequately covered law |
| Effect of prosecutor's closing argument on corroboration | Objection to corroboration discussion should have preserved error. | Objection was waived; argument did not misstate law. | No reversible error; argument did not misstate law |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilson v. State, 306 Ga. App. 827 (2010) (accomplice corroboration standard; jury determines sufficiency)
- Justice v. State, 263 Ga. App. 858 (2003) (credibility and identification within jury's province)
- Benbow v. State, 288 Ga. 192 (2010) (neighbor descriptions and physical evidence as corroboration)
- Howard v. State, 286 Ga. 222 (2009) (corroboration considerations and evidentiary standards)
- Anderson v. State, 286 Ga. 57 (2009) (contemporaneous objections and closing argument limits)
- Franklin v. State, 230 Ga. 291 (1973) (objection generality; pleadings impact on error preservation)