McGruder v. State

814 S.E.2d 293
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 7, 2018
DocketS18A0062
StatusPublished
Cited by31 cases

This text of 814 S.E.2d 293 (McGruder v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McGruder v. State, 814 S.E.2d 293 (Ga. 2018).

Opinion

Grant, Justice.

Rajonte McGruder was convicted of malice murder in the death of Kenneth Quarterman, Jr., aggravated assault against Lewis Brown III, and other crimes in connection with a drive-by shooting on June 16, 2013. On appeal, McGruder argues that the evidence admitted at trial was legally insufficient to support his convictions. We find that the evidence was sufficient to authorize the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that McGruder was guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted, and therefore affirm.1

*295I.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, the evidence presented at trial showed that late in the evening on June 15, 2013, McGruder and several other men associated with a street gang known as "MFG" assembled in a field near Club Apollo in Louisville, Georgia. There was a block party outside the club and the area was crowded with people. McGruder, Damien Simpkins, Dalonte Tarver, Octavius Hickson, and Jason Williams gathered in a circle to plot an attack on a group McGruder called the "Wrens Boys," which included Michael Reaves, Brown, and Quarterman. There was a history of conflict between MFG and the Wrens Boys. That night, McGruder understood that they were after Reaves in particular, because Reaves had been "talking trash" to the girlfriend of another MFG member.

Tarver and Hickson said, "We gonna get those n*****s tonight," and McGruder knew they were talking about the Wrens Boys. Tarver asked McGruder where his "colors" were, and then told McGruder he was going to have to drive. Tarver told Simpkins, who had a pistol in his waistband, that Simpkins was going to have to "do it," and pointed toward several of the Wrens Boys who were coming out of the club. McGruder, Simpkins, and another individual got into a black Dodge

Charger, with McGruder driving and Simpkins sitting in the driver's side rear seat. McGruder drove the Charger around the block and stopped in front of the Wrens Boys, and Simpkins fired several shots at the group.2 Quarterman was shot in the head and later died. Brown was shot in the face and the hand, but survived. Someone returned fire and a bullet struck the driver's window of the Charger, scaring McGruder. He sped away and drove several miles to a nearby town, where they left the Charger. Simpkins called someone McGruder did not know to come pick them up.

McGruder was arrested five days after the shooting, based on interviews with eyewitnesses to the shooting who identified McGruder as the driver of the Charger. Initially, McGruder said that he had been at the block party near Club Apollo but had gone home before the shooting. Eventually, however, McGruder admitted to driving the Charger as instructed by Tarver.

II.

In his sole enumeration of error, McGruder argues that the evidence summarized above was insufficient to support his convictions under the standard set out in Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). We disagree.

When evaluating a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we view all of the evidence admitted at trial in the light most *296favorable to the prosecution and ask whether any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes of which he was convicted. See Jackson , 443 U.S. at 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781. This evaluation "essentially addresses whether the government's case was so lacking that it should not have even been submitted to the jury." Musacchio v. United States , --- U.S. ----, ----, 136 S.Ct. 709, 715, 193 L.Ed.2d 639 (2016) (citation and punctuation omitted). Our limited review leaves to the jury the resolution of conflicts in the evidence, the weight of the evidence, the credibility of witnesses, and reasonable inferences to be made "from basic facts to ultimate facts." Id. (citation and punctuation omitted); see Walker v. State , 296 Ga. 161, 163, 766 S.E.2d 28 (2014).

McGruder's first challenge is to his murder conviction. He argues that no evidence showed that he knew or should have known that Simpkins would shoot at the Wrens Boys or that he fired a gun himself. That contention is incorrect. The jury could infer from the evidence admitted at trial that McGruder was aware of the pistol that was visible at Simpkins's waistline and knew that Simpkins was going to use the gun to shoot at the Wrens Boys. And while McGruder may not have personally fired the gun in the shooting, a person who intentionally assists in the commission of a crime may be convicted as a party to the crime. See OCGA § 16-2-20 ; Calloway v. State , 303 Ga. 48, 51, 810 S.E.2d 105 (2018). "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." Sapp v. State , 300 Ga. 768, 769, 798 S.E.2d 226 (2017) (citation and punctuation omitted). Here, evidence presented at trial-including McGruder's own statement to police-showed that McGruder heard Tarver and Hickson say that they were going to "get" the Wrens Boys and that he knew it was serious. He knew about the ongoing conflict with the Wrens Boys and that Reaves was a particular target that night. McGruder agreed to drive the car while Simpkins, who he knew had been told to "do it," rode in the back seat armed with a pistol. McGruder drove the car around the block and stopped directly in front of the Wrens Boys.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kenneth Hall v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2026
Jarrett Leopard v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2025
Rosenau v. State
914 S.E.2d 300 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2025)
Tedder v. State
907 S.E.2d 623 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2024)
Robert Jordan Mahogany v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2023
SILLAH v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
883 S.E.2d 756 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2023)
Drennon v. State
880 S.E.2d 139 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2022)
Kecia Wright v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2022
Goodman v. State
873 S.E.2d 150 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2022)
Butler v. State
872 S.E.2d 722 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2022)
Lofton v. State
309 Ga. 348 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2020)
Rich v. State
838 S.E.2d 255 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2020)
Chavez v. State
837 S.E.2d 766 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2020)
Bullard v. State
307 Ga. 482 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
NICHOLSON v. THE STATE (Two Cases)
307 Ga. 466 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
Jackson v. State
306 Ga. 706 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
Glenn v. State
306 Ga. 550 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
Cooper v. State
306 Ga. 547 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
Evans v. State
306 Ga. 403 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
Boyd v. State
306 Ga. 204 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
814 S.E.2d 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgruder-v-state-ga-2018.