Wallace v. State

605 S.E.2d 29, 278 Ga. 584, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 3585, 2004 Ga. LEXIS 997
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 8, 2004
DocketS04A0958
StatusPublished

This text of 605 S.E.2d 29 (Wallace 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
Wallace v. State, 605 S.E.2d 29, 278 Ga. 584, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 3585, 2004 Ga. LEXIS 997 (Ga. 2004).

Opinion

Fletcher, Chief Justice.

This appeal is the second appearance of this case. In the earlier appeal, this Court reversed Jermeal Wallace’s conviction for malice murder because of unconstitutional burden-shifting jury charges on intent and malice.1 The Court remanded for re-trial or re-sentencing. On remand, the trial court sentenced Wallace to life in prison for felony murder. Wallace now appeals, contending that the unconstitutional jury charge on intent also affected the felony murder count. Because the jury charge on intent did not affect the felony murder count, we affirm.

The evidence and proceedings in this case are set out fully in the prior appeal. Wallace was convicted of malice murder and two counts of felony murder for the death of the single victim. After this Court’s reversal of the malice murder conviction, the trial court sentenced Wallace to concurrent sentences on both felony murder counts. However, sentencing on only one count was proper,2 and, therefore, one sentence must be vacated.

[585]*585Decided November 8, 2004. Carl P. Greenberg, for appellant. PaulL. Howard, Jr., District Attorney, Bettieanne C. Hart, Christopher M. Quinn, Assistant District Attorneys, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General, Julie A. Adams, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

The underlying felony on one count was possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. As detailed in Wallace I, the charge on intent was unconstitutional in that it told the jury that the law presumes the intent to kill from the use of a deadly weapon. However, unlike malice murder, neither felony murder nor possession of a firearm by a convicted felon requires proof of an intent to kill.3 Because the erroneous charge on intent did not affect the felony murder count based on the underlying possession charge, no reversible error appears.4

Judgment affirmed in part and vacated in part.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Malcolm v. State
434 S.E.2d 479 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1993)
Wallace v. State
572 S.E.2d 579 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2002)
Smith v. State
262 S.E.2d 116 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
605 S.E.2d 29, 278 Ga. 584, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 3585, 2004 Ga. LEXIS 997, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-state-ga-2004.