Summary
The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed Dekito Champ’s convictions for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony arising from the shooting death of his former girlfriend. The Court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions but concluded that the record did not permit resolution of Champ’s claim that he was improperly absent from bench conferences during jury selection. The Court vacated the judgment in part and remanded for the trial court to conduct a hearing and rule initially on whether Champ acquiesced to his absences.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support Champ's murder and firearm convictions.
- Whether Champ's absence from bench conferences during jury selection violated his Georgia constitutional right to be present.
- Whether the existing appellate record established that Champ acquiesced to his absence from the bench conferences.
- Whether a right-to-be-present claim first raised on appeal should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing and initial factual findings by the trial court.
Holdings
- The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, was sufficient for a rational jury to find Champ guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes of which he was convicted.
- A defendant's Georgia constitutional right to be present applies to bench conferences during jury selection when the conferences involve discussions with prospective jurors or the removal of prospective jurors.
- A defendant may relinquish the right to be present through personal waiver, counsel's waiver at the defendant's express direction, counsel's waiver in the defendant's presence, or counsel's waiver followed by the defendant's informed acquiescence.
- When a defendant first raises a right-to-be-present claim on appeal and the claim cannot be easily rejected on the existing record, the case should be remanded to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing, factual findings, and an initial ruling on the claim.
Key quotations
“when a defendant raises a right-to-be-present claim for the first time on appeal, unless that claim can be easily rejected based on the existing record, the case should be remanded to the trial court for a hearing at which the parties have an opportunity to supplement the record with relevant evidence and after which the trial court may make factual findings and issue an order ruling on the claim, which may then be reviewed in a subsequent appeal.” (27-28)
“Proceedings at which the jury composition is selected or changed are . . . critical stage[s] [of a trial] at which the defendant is entitled to be present” (19-20)
“Judgment affirmed in part and vacated in part, and case remanded with direction.” (34)
Factual background
Champ and Jana Watson had a tumultuous former relationship, and Watson ended the relationship in January 2016. After continued harassment and threats, Watson went to Champ's residence on March 20, 2016, to retrieve a shared dog. Witnesses heard gunshots and saw Champ near Watson's vehicle; Watson died from multiple contact gunshot wounds, and Champ was also shot. Champ claimed Watson shot him first, but a suicide note and forensic evidence contradicted his account.
Procedural history
A Ben Hill County grand jury indicted Champ for malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and theft by receiving stolen property. Following an April 2018 trial, the jury convicted him of the remaining charges after the theft charge was nolle prossed; the trial court imposed life imprisonment for malice murder and five consecutive years for the firearm conviction. The trial court denied Champ's motions for new trial in January 2020, and Champ timely appealed. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the sufficiency determination but vacated the judgment in part and remanded for a hearing and initial ruling on the right-to-be-present claim.
Remand instructions
The trial court must hold a hearing at which Champ may raise his right-to-be-present claim and the parties may present evidence and argument concerning the claim, including whether Champ acquiesced to his absences. The trial court must then enter an order ruling on the claim, which may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia. The sufficiency determination and convictions were affirmed to the extent stated; the judgment was vacated in part.