308 Ga. 450 FINAL COPY
S20A0226. FRAZIER v. THE STATE.
Nahmias, Presiding Justice.
Appellant Michael Antonio Frazier, Jr., was convicted as a
party to the crimes of felony murder and possession of a firearm
during the commission of a felony in connection with the shooting
death of one of his accomplices, Quenterious Griner. Appellant’s sole
contention is that the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient
to support his convictions. We affirm.1
1 Griner was killed on February 7, 2016. On April 21, 2016, a Washington
County grand jury indicted Appellant, Mardriquez Harper, Brandon Seals, D’Andrious Brown, Tevyion Brown, Keyontray Johnson, and Tevon Scott. The charges against Appellant were felony murder based on aggravated assault, felony murder based on attempt to commit armed robbery, aggravated assault, attempt to commit armed robbery, and four counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Appellant was tried alone from September 10 to 13, 2018, and the jury found him guilty on all counts. The trial court sentenced Appellant to serve life in prison for felony murder based on attempted armed robbery and five consecutive years for one of the firearm offenses. The remaining counts merged or were vacated by operation of law. Appellant filed a timely motion for a new trial, which he later amended with new counsel. The trial court denied the motion on July 24, 2019. Appellant then filed a timely notice of appeal, and the case was docketed to the term of 1. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, the
evidence at trial showed the following. On the afternoon of February
7, 2016, Griner died from a gunshot wound after a shootout between
two groups of men at Kaolin Park in Sandersville. Earlier that day,
Appellant’s associate Mardriquez Harper spoke on the phone with
Harper’s friend Tykima Lovick. Lovick testified that she told Harper
that D’Andrious Brown had asked her to connect him with someone
who could sell him some marijuana. Lovick had previously
connected Brown with Harper for a drug transaction, and Harper
told Lovick to give Brown his phone number, which she did.
Brown then told Lovick that he was planning to rob Harper.
Lovick’s friend Kenisha Riddle testified that she overheard this
conversation because Lovick’s phone had the speaker on. Riddle sent
a Facebook message to Harper to let him know about Brown’s plan.
Lovick testified that she then called Harper to tell him not to meet
Brown. During the call, Lovick heard Harper say, “I’m on the same
this Court beginning in December 2019 and submitted for a decision on the briefs. s**t he on,” and someone in the background say, “I bagged up all
this weed and you telling me they don’t want it? Either somebody
gone get their money took or somebody gone get shot or killed.”
Riddle also heard someone in the background — not Harper — say,
“We got guns too.” Appellant told investigators in an audio-recorded
interview after the shooting that at the time of this phone call, he,
Griner, and Brandon Seals were with Harper. Appellant
acknowledged that a statement about guns was made, but he said
that neither Griner nor Seals spoke during the call and claimed that
Harper was the only man speaking. Lovick knew Harper and
testified that his voice was not the voice she heard in the
background; Lovick added that she did not think the voice was
Griner’s or Seals’s either.
During the same interview after the shooting, Appellant said
that after the phone call, Harper and his group, which had added a
man known as “Hakeem,” went to meet Brown at Kaolin Park.
Harper had asked the group to accompany him for “safety,” and
although Appellant did not have a gun, he knew that Harper and Griner were armed with guns. Harper’s group spread out around the
small park. Appellant and Harper then approached Brown, who was
sitting alone in his car in the parking lot. Hakeem hung back at the
woodline of the park. Griner and Seals approached the restroom at
the edge of the parking lot. As Seals kicked open the door, gunshots
were fired out of the restroom. Brown then got out of his car, and
Harper shot at him. Three men, who apparently had come with
Brown and were lying in wait in the restroom for Harper and his
group, came out and started shooting toward Appellant, Harper, and
Hakeem, who ran out of the park together through the woods.
Appellant’s cousin Ken Fragher was dropping off a neighbor,
Nicholas Johnson, at the park at the time of the shooting. Fragher
testified that when Appellant and Harper arrived at the park, they
walked up to his car and talked to him and Johnson; Harper
appeared to be armed. Griner and Seals also walked into the park
from the woodline. Johnson told Appellant and Harper that he saw
some men peeking out of the restroom, and then Harper said
something to Griner and Seals, who began walking toward the restroom. When Seals kicked open the restroom door, gunshots rang
out.
As Griner ran away from the restroom, he was shot once in the
back by a .40-caliber bullet; he died at the scene. At some point
during the gunfire, Seals was shot in the arm or shoulder.
Investigators later found four .40-caliber shell casings in and around
the restroom, one .380-caliber shell casing outside the restroom, and
two 9-millimeter shell casings in the parking lot. They also found
.22-caliber ammunition, a .22-caliber ammunition box, and a rod
from a revolver in the parking lot. The .40-caliber bullet that killed
Griner was matched to a gun that Brown gave investigators during
an interview.
As Appellant ran away from the park with Harper and
Hakeem, they encountered Lieutenant Wanda Peacock, a
Sandersville police officer who was responding to a call of shots fired
at the park. When Lieutenant Peacock first saw Appellant, he was
wearing a backpack. Although Harper kept running, Hakeem
stopped to talk to Lieutenant Peacock, while Appellant ran into a nearby house, then came back out a couple minutes later still
wearing the backpack. Lieutenant Peacock stopped Appellant and
searched the backpack, but found only a PlayStation gaming
console. She then let Appellant go after she received a call that there
was a “man down” at the park.
After the shooting, a group of people including Appellant and
Harper gathered at Seals’s house. Ricardo Burnett, a friend of Seals
and Harper, testified that he heard Appellant say, “[Harper] and
[Seals] and them was going out there to rob somebody and the guys
who was at the park that supposed to have been robbing them about
a drug deal . . . .” Appellant also said that Brown’s group “wanted
some weed or something, and they were gone rob them for money or
something” and that “[Seals] walked up and kicked the door and the
guys started shooting, and that’s when they took off running.”
Appellant did not testify at trial, but the jury heard evidence of
Appellant’s statements to investigators after the shooting. GBI
Special Agent Thomas Bell interviewed Appellant twice on the day
of the shooting in a non-custodial setting. Agent Bell testified that Appellant claimed in the first interview that at the time of the
shooting, he was at the park playing basketball and had nothing to
do with the shooting. In the second interview several hours later,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
308 Ga. 450 FINAL COPY
S20A0226. FRAZIER v. THE STATE.
Nahmias, Presiding Justice.
Appellant Michael Antonio Frazier, Jr., was convicted as a
party to the crimes of felony murder and possession of a firearm
during the commission of a felony in connection with the shooting
death of one of his accomplices, Quenterious Griner. Appellant’s sole
contention is that the evidence presented at his trial was insufficient
to support his convictions. We affirm.1
1 Griner was killed on February 7, 2016. On April 21, 2016, a Washington
County grand jury indicted Appellant, Mardriquez Harper, Brandon Seals, D’Andrious Brown, Tevyion Brown, Keyontray Johnson, and Tevon Scott. The charges against Appellant were felony murder based on aggravated assault, felony murder based on attempt to commit armed robbery, aggravated assault, attempt to commit armed robbery, and four counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Appellant was tried alone from September 10 to 13, 2018, and the jury found him guilty on all counts. The trial court sentenced Appellant to serve life in prison for felony murder based on attempted armed robbery and five consecutive years for one of the firearm offenses. The remaining counts merged or were vacated by operation of law. Appellant filed a timely motion for a new trial, which he later amended with new counsel. The trial court denied the motion on July 24, 2019. Appellant then filed a timely notice of appeal, and the case was docketed to the term of 1. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, the
evidence at trial showed the following. On the afternoon of February
7, 2016, Griner died from a gunshot wound after a shootout between
two groups of men at Kaolin Park in Sandersville. Earlier that day,
Appellant’s associate Mardriquez Harper spoke on the phone with
Harper’s friend Tykima Lovick. Lovick testified that she told Harper
that D’Andrious Brown had asked her to connect him with someone
who could sell him some marijuana. Lovick had previously
connected Brown with Harper for a drug transaction, and Harper
told Lovick to give Brown his phone number, which she did.
Brown then told Lovick that he was planning to rob Harper.
Lovick’s friend Kenisha Riddle testified that she overheard this
conversation because Lovick’s phone had the speaker on. Riddle sent
a Facebook message to Harper to let him know about Brown’s plan.
Lovick testified that she then called Harper to tell him not to meet
Brown. During the call, Lovick heard Harper say, “I’m on the same
this Court beginning in December 2019 and submitted for a decision on the briefs. s**t he on,” and someone in the background say, “I bagged up all
this weed and you telling me they don’t want it? Either somebody
gone get their money took or somebody gone get shot or killed.”
Riddle also heard someone in the background — not Harper — say,
“We got guns too.” Appellant told investigators in an audio-recorded
interview after the shooting that at the time of this phone call, he,
Griner, and Brandon Seals were with Harper. Appellant
acknowledged that a statement about guns was made, but he said
that neither Griner nor Seals spoke during the call and claimed that
Harper was the only man speaking. Lovick knew Harper and
testified that his voice was not the voice she heard in the
background; Lovick added that she did not think the voice was
Griner’s or Seals’s either.
During the same interview after the shooting, Appellant said
that after the phone call, Harper and his group, which had added a
man known as “Hakeem,” went to meet Brown at Kaolin Park.
Harper had asked the group to accompany him for “safety,” and
although Appellant did not have a gun, he knew that Harper and Griner were armed with guns. Harper’s group spread out around the
small park. Appellant and Harper then approached Brown, who was
sitting alone in his car in the parking lot. Hakeem hung back at the
woodline of the park. Griner and Seals approached the restroom at
the edge of the parking lot. As Seals kicked open the door, gunshots
were fired out of the restroom. Brown then got out of his car, and
Harper shot at him. Three men, who apparently had come with
Brown and were lying in wait in the restroom for Harper and his
group, came out and started shooting toward Appellant, Harper, and
Hakeem, who ran out of the park together through the woods.
Appellant’s cousin Ken Fragher was dropping off a neighbor,
Nicholas Johnson, at the park at the time of the shooting. Fragher
testified that when Appellant and Harper arrived at the park, they
walked up to his car and talked to him and Johnson; Harper
appeared to be armed. Griner and Seals also walked into the park
from the woodline. Johnson told Appellant and Harper that he saw
some men peeking out of the restroom, and then Harper said
something to Griner and Seals, who began walking toward the restroom. When Seals kicked open the restroom door, gunshots rang
out.
As Griner ran away from the restroom, he was shot once in the
back by a .40-caliber bullet; he died at the scene. At some point
during the gunfire, Seals was shot in the arm or shoulder.
Investigators later found four .40-caliber shell casings in and around
the restroom, one .380-caliber shell casing outside the restroom, and
two 9-millimeter shell casings in the parking lot. They also found
.22-caliber ammunition, a .22-caliber ammunition box, and a rod
from a revolver in the parking lot. The .40-caliber bullet that killed
Griner was matched to a gun that Brown gave investigators during
an interview.
As Appellant ran away from the park with Harper and
Hakeem, they encountered Lieutenant Wanda Peacock, a
Sandersville police officer who was responding to a call of shots fired
at the park. When Lieutenant Peacock first saw Appellant, he was
wearing a backpack. Although Harper kept running, Hakeem
stopped to talk to Lieutenant Peacock, while Appellant ran into a nearby house, then came back out a couple minutes later still
wearing the backpack. Lieutenant Peacock stopped Appellant and
searched the backpack, but found only a PlayStation gaming
console. She then let Appellant go after she received a call that there
was a “man down” at the park.
After the shooting, a group of people including Appellant and
Harper gathered at Seals’s house. Ricardo Burnett, a friend of Seals
and Harper, testified that he heard Appellant say, “[Harper] and
[Seals] and them was going out there to rob somebody and the guys
who was at the park that supposed to have been robbing them about
a drug deal . . . .” Appellant also said that Brown’s group “wanted
some weed or something, and they were gone rob them for money or
something” and that “[Seals] walked up and kicked the door and the
guys started shooting, and that’s when they took off running.”
Appellant did not testify at trial, but the jury heard evidence of
Appellant’s statements to investigators after the shooting. GBI
Special Agent Thomas Bell interviewed Appellant twice on the day
of the shooting in a non-custodial setting. Agent Bell testified that Appellant claimed in the first interview that at the time of the
shooting, he was at the park playing basketball and had nothing to
do with the shooting. In the second interview several hours later,
Appellant changed his story and said that he witnessed the shooting
and that “they were planning to meet there for a drug transaction”;
Appellant also said that he and Harper were “posted on the woodline
looking at the car, initially.” In another non-custodial interview
about two weeks later, the audio recording of which was played for
the jury, Appellant admitted that he went to the park with Harper,
Griner, and Seals, and he gave the account discussed above.
2. Appellant’s only claim on appeal is that the evidence
presented at his trial was legally insufficient to support his
convictions. We disagree.
(a) The legal principles applicable to our review of Appellant’s
claim are well established.
When we consider the sufficiency of the evidence [as a matter of federal due process], our review is limited to whether the trial evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, is sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes of which he was convicted. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U. S. 307, 319 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); Mims v. State, 304 Ga. 851, 853 (1) (a) (823 SE2d 325) (2019). “Under this review, we must put aside any questions about conflicting evidence, the credibility of witnesses, or the weight of the evidence, leaving the resolution of such things to the discretion of the trier of fact.” Mims, 304 Ga. at 853 (1) (a) (citation and punctuation omitted).
Clark v. State, 307 Ga. 537, 539 (837 SE2d 265) (2019). In addition,
as a matter of Georgia statutory law, “[t]o warrant a conviction on
circumstantial evidence, the proved facts shall not only be consistent
with the hypothesis of guilt, but shall exclude every other reasonable
hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused.” OCGA § 24-14-6.
Whether alternative hypotheses are reasonable, however, is usually
a question for the jury, and this Court will not disturb the jury’s
finding unless it is insufficient as a matter of law. See Graves v.
State, 306 Ga. 485, 487 (831 SE2d 747) (2019).
To convict Appellant of felony murder and possession of a
firearm during the commission of a felony, the State was not
required to prove that he personally fired the shot that killed Griner,
only that Appellant was a party to the crimes, meaning that he intentionally aided or abetted in the commission of the crimes or
intentionally advised, encouraged, counseled, or procured someone
else to commit the crimes. See OCGA § 16-2-20 (b) (defining parties
to a crime); Bryant v. State, 296 Ga. 456, 458 (769 SE2d 57) (2015)
(“‘A person who does not directly commit a crime may be convicted
upon proof that the crime was committed and that person was a
party to it.’” (citation omitted)). “While mere presence at the scene
of a crime is not sufficient evidence to convict one of being a party to
a crime, criminal intent may be inferred from presence,
companionship, and conduct before, during, and after the offense.”
Parks v. State, 304 Ga. 313, 315-316 (818 SE2d 502) (2018) (citation
and punctuation omitted). See also Broxton v. State, 306 Ga. 127,
136 (829 SE2d 333) (2019).
Moreover, Appellant could be found guilty of felony murder
even if he did not intentionally aid or encourage the shooting of
Griner, as long as Appellant was a party to the underlying felony
that was a proximate cause of his accomplice’s death. See OCGA §
16-5-1 (c); State v. Jackson, 287 Ga. 646, 660 (697 SE2d 757) (2010). “Proximate causation imposes liability for the reasonably
foreseeable results of criminal . . . conduct if there is no sufficient,
independent, and unforeseen intervening cause.” Jackson, 287 Ga.
at 654. See also Robinson v. State, 298 Ga. 455, 457-459 (782 SE2d
657) (2016) (holding that the fatal shooting of the defendant’s
accomplice by the victim during an attempted armed robbery was
foreseeable); Jackson, 287 Ga. at 652 (explaining that the
defendants “planned an armed robbery of someone they believed to
be a drug dealer, who also turned out to be armed, an occurrence not
unusual among drug dealers”).
(b) Applying these legal principles, the evidence presented at
Appellant’s trial supported the jury’s rational finding, beyond a
reasonable doubt, that Appellant was not just an innocent bystander
but rather a party both to the attempted armed robbery that
foreseeably led to the shootout in which his accomplice Griner was
killed, and to the possession of a firearm by an accomplice during
the commission of that felony. To begin with, Appellant admitted
that he was with Harper, Griner, and Seals before the shooting, and the jury could have reasonably inferred that Appellant was the
person whom Lovick and Riddle overheard in the background of
Lovick’s phone call with Harper encouraging the armed robbery and
stating that Harper’s group had guns too.
Appellant also admitted that he accompanied his accomplices,
at least two of whom were armed with guns, to the park to confront
Brown, knowing that Harper’s group and Brown planned to rob each
other in the course of a purported drug deal and that Harper wanted
his associates there for “safety.” At the park, Harper and his
associates spread out, with Appellant and Harper “posted” at the
woodline before they approached Brown in the parking lot.
Appellant’s accomplice Seals made the first aggressive move by
kicking open the restroom door where Johnson saw men peeking
out. And in response to the gunfire from Brown’s associates, Harper,
with whom Appellant was standing, shot at Brown.
Two of Appellant’s accomplices were shot – Griner fatally –
while Appellant fled the scene with his other two associates and
evaded a responding police officer for a few minutes by running into a house. After the shooting, Appellant was with Harper again at
Seals’s house, where Appellant was overheard discussing the
shooting in a way that further indicated that he knew a drug-related
robbery had been expected to take place at the park. Appellant also
initially lied to investigators by denying any involvement in the
shooting.
Viewed as a whole, this evidence was sufficient to support
Appellant’s convictions as a matter of due process and under OCGA
§ 24-14-6. See, e.g., Parks, 304 Ga. at 316; Muckle v. State, 302 Ga.
675, 678-679 (808 SE2d 713) (2017); Robinson, 298 Ga. at 457-459;
Hill v. State, 297 Ga. 675, 677-678 (777 SE2d 460) (2015); Bryant,
296 Ga. at 458.
Judgment affirmed. Melton, C. J., and Blackwell, Boggs, Peterson, Warren, Bethel, and Ellington, JJ., concur.
DECIDED APRIL 6, 2020. Murder. Washington Superior Court. Before Judge Reeves. Randall P. Sharp, for appellant. S. Hayward Altman, District Attorney, Kelly J. Weathers, Assistant District Attorney; Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Katherine D. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.