Gary Simpson was convicted of three counts each of malice murder, aggravated assault and concealing a death. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment for the murders, and to consecutive 20- and 10-year terms for the remaining crimes. Simpson’s motion for new trial was denied, and he appeals. 1
*337 1. Simpson was indicted with two others. One of them, Michael Johnson, pled guilty to three counts of voluntary manslaughter, and testified against Simpson and the remaining co-defendant, Leo Parks. Johnson testified that he and Parks worked for Simpson. The three victims were Martin Hernandez, Ricardo Hernandez and Moisés Aldaco. They were also employed by Simpson and, on the day of the murders, were helping to build a barbecue pit at his Fulton County residence. Simpson was angry, because he believed that one of the victims had burglarized his home. Assisted by Johnson and Parks, Simpson bound the victims and lifted them into the back of a truck. He then shot each of them. Simpson and Parks covered the bodies with lime and potting soil. Johnson, followed by Simpson and Parks, drove the truck to Coweta County, where they abandoned it along the side of the interstate highway.
Johnson was an accomplice, and he provided the only direct evidence of Simpson’s guilt. Thus, the validity of the convictions hinges upon the corroboration of Johnson’s testimony. OCGA § 24-4-8. However, slight evidence connecting Simpson to the crimes would be sufficient for that purpose.
Hinely v. State,
2. Simpson contends that the ineffectiveness of his trial counsel is a ground for reversal of the convictions. To prevail on this claim, he must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that it prejudiced the defense to the criminal charges.
Strickland v. Washington,
In his brief, Simpson contends that trial counsel did not interview city maintenance workers who were near his home on the day of the murders and who would have heard gunshots had any been fired. However, he never raised this below as a ground of alleged ineffectiveness. Instead, the transcript of the hearing on the motion for new trial shows that Simpson failed either to allege or to prove the existence of the workers. He certainly did not make a proffer of their exculpatory testimony, which would be necessary in order to show that the failure to interview and to call them as defense witnesses was a prejudicial deficiency in the representation.
Strong v. State,
The contentions concerning the adequacy of defense counsel’s trial preparation related to the existence of a certain woman whom Simpson urges might have provided him with an alibi. When asked about this potential witness, however, counsel replied that he had interviewed her on several occasions before trial, but that she indicated that she knew nothing about the crimes and never mentioned being with Simpson during the time when the State contended they were committed. At the motion for new trial hearing, the woman did not dispute the attorney’s recollection. Compare
Richardson v. State,
3. The trial court did not err in sentencing Simpson to life imprisonment for the murders, rather than imposing determinate sentences of a specific number of years for those crimes. See OCGA §§ 16-5-1 (d), 17-10-1 (a) (1);
Echols v. Thomas,
Judgments affirmed.
Notes
The crimes were committed on April 25, 2002. The grand jury indicted Simpson on July 23,2002, and the jury found him guilty on November 13,2002. On November 15,2002, the trial court entered judgments of conviction and imposed the sentences. Simpson filed a motion for new trial on December 4, 2002. The trial court denied that motion on December 19,2003, and, on that same day, Simpson filed a notice of appeal. The case was docketed in this Court on March 3, 2004. The appeal was submitted for decision on April 26, 2004.