Summary
The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the convictions of Chrissharnard Stewart, Christopher Snelson, and Courtney Smith for felony murder and aggravated assault arising from a motel robbery and shooting. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, including party-to-a-crime liability and aggravated assault findings. It vacated the sentences in part because the trial court failed to sentence the appellants on the armed robbery counts and remanded for resentencing.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the appellants’ convictions for aggravated assault against Sabrina when no firearm was pointed directly at her.
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Snelson’s aggravated-assault conviction for striking Khaljil with a firearm.
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Snelson’s and Smith’s convictions as parties to the crimes.
- Whether the trial court properly handled the two felony-murder convictions and the merger or sentencing of the underlying armed robbery count.
- Whether Stewart established that the prosecutor misled the jury about an alleged undisclosed deal with accomplice-witness Terry York.
- Whether Stewart’s ineffective-assistance claim based on counsel’s failure to object to victim-impact argument was preserved for appellate review.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient to support the aggravated-assault conviction because Sabrina’s observation of an intruder pointing a gun at Khaljil reasonably placed her in apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury, even though the gun was not pointed directly at her.
- The evidence was sufficient to support Snelson’s aggravated-assault conviction because the jury could credit Khaljil’s testimony that he was struck or hit in the head with a firearm, notwithstanding his testimony that he was also 'politely tapped.'
- The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find that Snelson and Smith were at least parties to the charged crimes because their presence, conduct before and after the offenses, participation in the robbery plan, travel with the perpetrators, and division of the stolen marijuana supported an inference of shared criminal intent.
- Because both felony-murder counts involved the same victim, one felony-murder guilty verdict was vacated by operation of law. The armed robbery verdict could not merge into the vacated felony-murder conviction or into the remaining felony-murder conviction, so the sentences had to be vacated in part and the cases remanded for sentencing on armed robbery.
- Stewart failed to establish that the prosecutor misled the jury because the record contained no evidence of a deal with York at the time of his testimony, and Stewart was able to cross-examine York about his motives.
- Stewart’s claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to improper victim-impact argument was not preserved for appellate review because it was not raised at the earliest practicable moment in the amended motion for new trial or at the motion-for-new-trial hearing.
Key quotations
“A person commits the offense of aggravated assault when he uses a deadly weapon to commit an act which places another [person] in reasonable apprehension of immediately receiving a violent injury.” (at 627)
“Although mere presence at the scene of a crime is not sufficient to prove that one was a party to the crime, ‘presence, companionship, and conduct before and after the offense are circumstances from which one’s participation in the criminal intent may be inferred.’” (at 628)
“Because both murder counts involved the same victim, one of the guilty verdicts was vacated by operation of law.” (at 630-631)
“The underlying felony does not merge, as a matter of law, into a vacated felony murder conviction.” (at 631)
Factual background
The victims were staying in a motel room where Eric Smith was selling marijuana. After earlier marijuana transactions, Snelson returned to the room, snatched a $5 bill from Khaljil Smith, and two masked men entered; one struck Khaljil with a firearm. Eric fled the room and was shot and killed outside, after which the perpetrators returned and stole packaged marijuana. Evidence from an accomplice and a witness, motel surveillance, DNA on a recovered beanie, and the appellants’ subsequent possession and division of the marijuana supported the jury’s findings that the appellants participated in the planned armed robbery and resulting crimes.
Procedural history
A Gwinnett County grand jury indicted Stewart, Snelson, Smith, and Terry York for murder-related offenses, aggravated assaults, and armed robbery. After a joint trial from August 4 through August 13, 2014, the jury acquitted the appellants of malice murder but convicted them of the other charged offenses. The trial court denied their motions for new trial on July 24, 2015, and the appellants timely appealed. The Supreme Court consolidated the appeals, affirmed the convictions, vacated the sentences to the extent the appellants were not sentenced on armed robbery, and remanded for resentencing.
Remand instructions
Vacate the appellants’ sentences to the extent they were not sentenced on the armed robbery counts and remand for the trial court to sentence each appellant on the applicable armed robbery count. The convictions remain affirmed.