Smith v. State

Topics

Practice areas

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support Smith's convictions.
2. Whether the trial court erred in denying a new trial on the general grounds that the verdict was contrary to the evidence and against the weight of the evidence.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Smith's motion to strike a prospective juror for cause based on the juror's prior domestic-violence experience and stated concern about men hitting women.
4. Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by withdrawing the motion to suppress Smith's custodial statements, failing to object to evidence and testimony concerning those statements, and failing to object to introduction of the weapon.
5. Whether the trial court improperly merged Smith's conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon into his malice-murder conviction.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Smith guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offenses for which he was convicted.
2. The Supreme Court of Georgia could not grant a new trial on the general grounds, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Smith's motion after exercising its thirteenth-juror function.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion because the prospective juror ultimately affirmed that she could decide the case impartially based solely on the trial evidence and would not hold bias against Smith based on her prior experience.
4. Smith failed to establish deficient performance because counsel's withdrawal of the suppression motion and failure to object were deliberate trial-strategy decisions made after learning that Smith intended to testify.
5. Smith failed to establish ineffective assistance because he did not question trial counsel about the failure to object and because the proposed fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree objection lacked merit.
6. The conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon did not merge as a matter of fact into the malice-murder conviction because it required proof of possession of a firearm and convicted-felon status, elements not required for malice murder. The trial court therefore had to sentence Smith separately on that count.

Key quotations

Factual background

Smith shot his girlfriend, Sherita Dunham, after becoming angry because he believed she had taken $400 and his cell phone. Witnesses saw Smith strike Dunham with a revolver and pull her into the house before hearing a gunshot; the medical examiner testified that the fatal wound was a contact wound. Smith called 911, falsely claimed that Dunham had arrived bleeding, disassembled and hid the revolver, and later told investigators where the weapon parts were located after initially requesting an attorney. Ballistic and other physical evidence contradicted Smith's claim that the shooting was accidental.

Procedural history

A Fulton County grand jury indicted Smith on six counts arising from the shooting death of Sherita Dunham. Following a jury trial, Smith was convicted on all counts; the trial court imposed life imprisonment for malice murder and a consecutive five-year sentence for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, while other convictions were vacated or merged. The trial court denied Smith's amended motion for new trial, and Smith timely appealed. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the convictions, vacated the portion of the sentencing order merging the convicted-felon firearm-possession count into the murder conviction, and remanded for resentencing on that count.

Remand instructions

The portion of the sentencing order merging Count 6, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, into Count 1, malice murder, is vacated. The case is remanded to the trial court for resentencing on Count 6. The convictions are affirmed.