NOTICE: This opinion is subject to modification resulting from motions for reconsideration under Supreme Court Rule 27, the Court’s reconsideration, and editorial revisions by the Reporter of Decisions. The version of the opinion published in the Advance Sheets for the Georgia Reports, designated as the “Final Copy,” will replace any prior version on the Court’s website and docket. A bound volume of the Georgia Reports will contain the final and official text of the opinion.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: October 21, 2025
S25A0736. REID v. THE STATE.
ELLINGTON, Justice.
Isaac Reid appeals his convictions for malice murder and other
crimes in connection with the shooting death of Wildarius Draggs.1
1 The crimes occurred on March 15, 2022. On June 8, 2022, a Spalding
County grand jury returned an indictment charging Reid, Cameron Barkley, Kinesa Harvey, and DeQuivon McMullin with malice murder (Count 1); felony murder (Counts 2 and 4), aggravated battery (Count 3); aggravated assault (Counts 5-6, for assaulting both Draggs and Rayshon Goodrum); and violations of the Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act (Counts 7-9). Reid, Harvey, and McMullin were jointly tried for the crimes. Barkley testified against his co-defendants at trial in the hope of obtaining leniency from the State. Following a jury trial that ran from September 18 to September 23, 2023, the jury found Reid not guilty of Count 8 but guilty of the remaining counts. Harvey was found not guilty on all counts. McMullin was found guilty of the aggravated battery of Draggs and of felony murder predicated on that aggravated battery but was acquitted of the remaining counts. McMullin’s case is not a part of this appeal. On September 25, 2023, the trial court sentenced Reid to life in prison without the possibility of parole for malice murder (Count 1); to 20 years in prison for the aggravated assault of Goodrum (Count 6), to run consecutively to Count 1; and to 20 years in prison for a gang-act violation (Count 7), to run consecutively to Count 6. The felony murder counts (Counts 2 and 4) were vacated by operation of law, and the remaining counts merged for sentencing purposes (Counts 3, 5, and 9). On appeal, Reid contends that the trial court erred by denying his
motion for new trial on the general grounds. He also contends that
the evidence was not legally sufficient to support his conviction
under federal due process standards and that the evidence failed to
satisfy the accomplice-corroboration requirement of OCGA § 24-14-
8. For the reasons that follow, we reject these claims and affirm
Reid’s convictions.
1. The evidence presented at trial included a surveillance video
from a local school building, which showed that, at approximately
5:19 p.m. on March 15, 2022, Rayshon Goodrum arrived at 1001
Lake Avenue in Griffin, Georgia, where Draggs lived with his aunt,
Monica Fambro. After Goodrum arrived at Fambro’s house, he and
Draggs sat on the front porch of the home. Fambro’s home was
located on the corner of North 16th Street and Lake Avenue, with
Reid filed a timely motion for new trial on October 3, 2023, and then filed an amended motion for new trial through new appellate counsel on September 3, 2024. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the amended motion for new trial on November 6, 2024. Reid filed a timely notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals, which transferred the case to this Court on February 11, 2025. The case was docketed to this Court’s April 2025 term and submitted for a decision on the briefs. 2 the front porch facing Lake Avenue and one side of the house facing
North 16th Street, and the neighborhood is part of “Lit Block,” an
area controlled by the Bloods Rollin’ 20s gang, also known as the
“Zoo Krew.”
The surveillance video showed that, at approximately 5:29
p.m., about ten minutes after Goodrum arrived at Fambro’s house,
a white Ford Fusion, which belonged to DeQuivon McMullin’s
mother, drove down North 16th Street toward its intersection with
Lake Avenue. With the front passenger window down, the car “slow
rolled” through the intersection and “slowly passed” Fambro’s house
in front of the porch where Draggs and Goodrum were sitting. The
car was driven by Kinesa Harvey, and Reid (Harvey’s brother) was
in the front passenger seat, while McMullin and Cameron Barkley
were in the rear passenger seat. Barkley testified that he, Reid, and
McMullin were members of the Zoo Krew, but Harvey was not. 2
During the car ride, Reid showed a gold Glock 19 handgun to
2 In the order denying Reid’s motion for new trial, the trial court noted
that, after Reid’s trial, Barkley pled guilty to aggravated assault and gang activity and was sentenced “twenty years serve one.” 3 Barkley and McMullin. The surveillance video shows that, at 5:44
p.m., the Ford Fusion was again driving north on North 16th Street
toward its intersection with Lake Avenue, but stopped in front of a
house on North 16th Street that was several houses before the
intersection. Three people exited the car at that house. Barkley
testified that he, Reid, and McMullin were the three who exited the
car, and a law enforcement official also identified the three people
from surveillance video as Reid, McMullin, and Barkley. The house
on North 16th Street was a popular spot for neighborhood teenagers
to buy snacks after school and for gang members to gather.
A path ran from the backyard of the house on North 16th Street
to 1010 Lake Avenue, which was down the block and on the opposite
side of the street from Fambro’s house. Reid, McQuivon, and Barkley
stood on the front porch of the house on North 16th Street for about
a minute before moving to the side of the house towards the path, at
which point they disappeared from the video camera’s view toward
the backyard. Barkley testified that once they were on the path
behind the house, Reid offered the gun to both Barkley and
4 McMullin. When both refused to take it, Reid continued down the
path alone, and Barkley saw Reid fire shots toward Draggs and
Goodrum from 1010 Lake Avenue. Reid was gone about thirty
seconds, and the group ran after the shooting. At 5:53 p.m., Reid,
McMullin, and Barkley reappeared on camera at the house on North
16th Street and then walked away together, heading south on North
16th Street away from Lake Avenue. The surveillance camera at the
school building did not capture any part of the shooting.
Barkley testified that he, Reid, and McMullin thought that
there was an “opp,” a member of an opposing gang, on the porch of
the house and that was the reason Reid fired shots at the porch. Law
enforcement officials found six shell casings along the side of the
house at 1010 Lake Avenue, but because no handgun was ever
located, the casings were not sent for any kind of forensic testing.
The State, however, did introduce into evidence a photograph of
members of the Zoo Krew holding a gold gun, and Barkley testified
that members of the gang shared guns and that the gold gun in the
photograph was the gun that Reid had on the day of the crimes.
5 At 5:50 p.m., shortly before the shooting, Fambro arrived home
from work. She walked by Draggs and Goodrum on the porch, “came
in the house, went towards the kitchen, and then ... just heard six
shots;” Draggs and Goodrum then ran inside. Draggs stated “I’ve
been hit,” and Goodrum hid in Fambro’s pantry. Fambro called 911
at 5:54 p.m. and police officers began arriving on the scene a few
minutes later. Draggs told the first officer who arrived that he had
been shot by a stray bullet and did not see who shot him. Draggs
later died from a single gunshot wound that penetrated both of his
lungs and his heart.
A law enforcement officer testified that he thought that the
shooting occurred at 5:52 p.m., as, according to his review of the
surveillance footage, a bird, which had not reacted to cars driving by
Fambro’s house, flew away from her house at that time. However,
when asked on cross whether it was possible that the bird just
decided that it was going to fly away at that time and that the
shooting occurred after the bird flew away, the officer said that was
“plausible.”
6 In an interview with law enforcement officials on the day of the
crimes, Reid admitted that he was dropped off at the house on North
16th Street on the day of the crimes. He also said that he heard the
gunshots and thought that someone might be shooting at him. The
evidence at trial also showed that on March 17, Reid sent Harvey a
screen shot of a newspaper article about the shooting of Draggs.
The State’s gang expert testified that he knew that Goodrum
lived in an area of Griffin known to be “Crip territory” and that he
saw Goodrum there “constantly.” He could not, however, “say that
he is a Crip.” The expert was not familiar with Draggs and did not
know whether he had any kind of gang affiliation. The expert
explained that the Zoo Krew referred to a member of a rival gang as
an “opp, short for opposition.” Under Zoo Krew rules, “no Crips [are]
allowed on their turf,” and if a Zoo Krew member saw a Crip in their
territory, the member “would have to act upon that.” Moreover, a
Zoo Krew member could gain respect and rank in the gang by
committing acts of violence against rival gang members. Further,
failure to assault a rival gang member found in Zoo Krew territory
7 could result in discipline from gang leadership. The expert added
that based on his investigation of Reid, McMullin, and Barkley,
including the language and hand signs they used in social media
posts and the clothes they wore, they were members of the Zoo Krew.
2. Reid contends that the evidence was insufficient to support
his convictions under federal due process standards. See Jackson v.
Virginia, 443 US 307 (1979). We disagree.
When evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence as a matter of
constitutional due process, we view the evidence presented at trial
in the light most favorable to the verdicts and consider whether it
was 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, 443 US at 319; Moore v. State, 311
Ga. 506, 508 (2021). “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.” Wilson v. State, 320 Ga. 766, 768
(2025) (citation and quotation marks omitted).
8 Reid argues that the evidence was not sufficient as a matter of
constitutional due process because it showed only that he was
present, along with Barkley and McMullin, at the house on North
16th Street at the time of the shooting and failed to show that he
fired the shots from 1010 Lake Avenue. 3 In support of this
contention, he points to the State’s failure to present certain types
of evidence, such as evidence that, while riding in Harvey’s car on
the day of the crimes, the co-defendants discussed plans to commit
the crimes; evidence that, after the crimes, the co-defendants sent
text messages or had other communications discussing the shooting;
or evidence of a murder weapon tying Reid to the shell casings found
at 1010 Lake Avenue. “However, the fact that the State did not
produce certain types of evidence does not mean that the evidence
was insufficient.” Jones v. State, 319 Ga. 758, 761 (2024) (citation
3 Because we no longer automatically review sua sponte the sufficiency
of the evidence, except that of murder convictions resulting in the death penalty, we will not “consider[ ] all conceivable sufficiency-related issues.” Scoggins v. State, 317 Ga. 832, 837 n.6 (2023). Instead, we limit our consideration to the argument that Reid “actually makes in challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.” Id.
9 and quotation marks omitted). “Although the State is required to
prove its case with competent evidence, there is no requirement that
it prove its case with any particular sort of evidence.” Id. at 761-62
(citation and quotation marks omitted).
Moreover, Reid challenges his convictions on the ground that
Barkley was not a credible witness because he was a co-defendant
and accomplice in this case. However, in conducting a sufficiency
review as a matter of constitutional due process, “we do not evaluate
witness credibility,” but instead leave that undertaking “to the sole
discretion of the jury.” Garcia-Solis v. State, 320 Ga. 754, 760 (2025)
(citation and quotation marks omitted). Accord Rouse v. State, ___
Ga. ___ (2025), S25A0959, slip op. at 13 (Ga. Aug. 12, 2025)
(rejecting a defendant’s challenge to his conviction on the basis that
accomplice testimony was not credible “because the determination
of whether witness testimony is ... credible is one left for the jury
and not considered by this Court on review”).
Similarly, Reid asserts that there was conflicting evidence
regarding the time the shots were fired, either at 5:52 p.m. or 5:53
10 p.m., that the weight of the evidence showed that the shots were
fired at 5:53 p.m., and that the firing of the shots at that time would
not have permitted Reid to fire shots from 1010 Lake Avenue and
then reemerge from behind the house on North 16th Street shortly
thereafter. However, based on the evidence highlighted by Reid, as
well as other evidence in the case, such as evidence that Fambro
arrived home at 5:50 p.m., heard the shots shortly after entering her
home, and called 911 at 5:54 p.m., it was for the jury to determine
when the shots were fired toward the victims and whether Reid
would have had time to fire those shots at that time and reemerge
at the house on North 16th Street shortly after 5:53 p.m. See Guyton
v. State, 321 Ga. 57, 59 (2025) (explaining that in reviewing the
sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, this Court “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” (citation and quotation
marks omitted)).
Reid also argues that the State failed to prove that Goodrum
11 was a member of the Crips gang and that the State’s theory of the
case—that Goodrum was targeted because he was a member of the
Crips gang in Zoo Krew territory—is therefore not supported by the
evidence. As Reid correctly notes, the State’s gang expert testified
that he was not positive that Goodrum was a member of the Crips
gang. However, he testified that Goodrum lived in Crips territory,
and the expert “constantly” saw him there. Moreover, to support its
theory that the motive for the shooting was gang related, the State
was not required to prove that Goodrum was a member of the Crips
gang, just that Reid thought that he was, and here, Barkley testified
that Reid shot at Goodrum because the teenagers thought that there
was an “opp,” a member of an opposing gang, on the porch of
Fambro’s house.
Leaving the foregoing issues of evidentiary conflict, weight,
and credibility to the jury, we conclude that, when viewed in the
light most favorable to the verdicts, the evidence was sufficient as a
matter of constitutional due process to show that Reid was not
merely present at the house on North 16th Street at the time of the
12 shooting. See Guyton, 321 Ga. at 59. Here, the evidence at trial,
including surveillance footage, showed that Reid, Barkley, and
McMullin “slow rolled” by Fambro’s home in Harvey’s car when
Draggs and Goodrum were sitting on the front porch. The footage
also showed that a short time later, the group was dropped off in
front of the house on North 16th Street, walked behind the house,
was out of sight of the surveillance footage during the approximate
time of the shooting, and then reemerged shortly after the shooting.
Barkley testified that they believed Goodrum to be a rival in their
territory, that Reid was armed, that Reid fired shots from 1010 Lake
Avenue towards 1001 Lake Avenue where Goodrum and Draggs
were sitting on the porch, and that the three then ran back to the
house on North 16th Street. This evidence, construed in the light
most favorable to the verdicts, was sufficient for the jury to find that
Reid fired the fatal shot from 1010 Lake Avenue and thus to
conclude that Reid “was more than merely present” during the
crimes. Boone v. State, 321 Ga. 820, 826 (2025) (citation and
quotation marks omitted).
13 For the foregoing reasons, we reject Reid’s constitutional due
process challenges to his convictions.
3. Reid contends that the State failed to corroborate Barkley’s
testimony and thus failed to satisfy the statutory accomplice-
corroboration requirement. See OCGA § 24-14-8.
Under OCGA § 24-14-8, the testimony of an accomplice in
felony cases “must be corroborated by other evidence implicating the
defendant.” McGarity v. State, 308 Ga. 417, 420 (2020). The
corroborating evidence must be “independent of” the accomplice’s
testimony and must “directly connect[ ] [the defendant] to the crime
or lead[ ] to the inference of guilt.” Pindling v. State, 321 Ga. 231,
237 (2025) (citation and quotation marks omitted). “The
independent corroborating evidence need only be ‘slight’ and can be
entirely circumstantial.” Id. (citation omitted).
Here, there was evidence independent of Barkley’s testimony
leading to the inference that Reid was guilty of the crimes. That
evidence included a photograph showing members of the Zoo Krew
holding a gold gun; Reid’s statement that he was dropped off at the
14 house on North 16th Street before the shooting; and surveillance
footage that showed that Harvey’s car drove slowly in front of the
porch on which the victims were sitting. A law enforcement official
identified Reid, McMullin, and Barkley from the surveillance
footage as the three people who were dropped off from Harvey’s car
at the house on North 16th Street a few minutes before the shooting.
In addition, the surveillance footage shows that the three then
walked behind the house, where there was a path that led to the
location from which the shots were fired, and that they reemerged
shortly after the shooting by the house on North 16th Street.
Moreover, the gang expert testified, independently of Barkley, that
Reid, Barkley, and McMullin were members of the Zoo Krew and
that the gang encouraged retaliation against members of other
gangs who were in its territory. In sum, taken together, the evidence
corroborating Barkley’s testimony was sufficient to satisfy the
requirements of OCGA § 24-14-8. See Washington v. State, 320 Ga.
839, 845 (2025) (concluding that an accomplice’s testimony was
adequately corroborated by, among other evidence, surveillance
15 footage that showed the movements of the defendant to which the
accomplice had testified); Veal v. State, 298 Ga. 691, 694-695 (2016)
(rejecting argument that accomplice’s testimony was not sufficiently
corroborated based, in part, on evidence that co-defendants were
members of the same gang), overruled on other grounds by Holmes
v. State, 311 Ga. 698, 705 (2021); Head v. State, 316 Ga. 406, 411,
(explaining that corroborating evidence “may be circumstantial,
slight, and need not be of itself sufficient to warrant a conviction of
the crime charged”).
4. Reid argues that the trial court, sitting as the thirteenth
juror, should have exercised its discretion to grant him a new trial.
See OCGA §§ 5-5-20 and 5-5-21. However, “[o]n appeal from the
denial of a motion under th[ese] Code Section[s], this Court reviews
whether the trial court exercised its discretion as the thirteenth
juror, but the decision to grant a new trial on the general grounds is
vested solely in the trial court and is not subject to our review.”
Tucker v. State, ___ Ga. ___ (2025), S25A0556, slip op. at 8-9 (Ga.
Sept. 16, 2025) (citation and quotation marks omitted). Here, the
16 record clearly shows that the trial court properly performed its duty
as the thirteenth juror in denying Reid’s motion for new trial, and
that decision is not subject to further review by this Court. Id.
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.