Locklear v. State

317 Ga. 115

891 S.E.2d 792

LOCKLEAR v. The STATE.

S23A0601

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Decided: August 21, 2023

David T. Lock, David T. Lock, LLC, P.O. Box 14286, Savannah, Georgia 31416, for Appellant.

Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Matthew Blackwell Crowder, Assistant Attorney General, Paula Khristian Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Department of Law, 40 Capitol Square, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30334, Margaret Ellen Heap, District Attorney, Office of the District Attorney Eastern Judicial Circuit, P. O. Box 2309, Savannah, Georgia 31402, Shalena Cook Jones, District Attorney, Brian Walter DeBlasiis, A.D.A., Chatham County District Attorney's Office, 133 Montgomery Street, Suite 600, Savannah, Georgia 31401, Jillian H. Gibson, A.D.A., Eastern Judicial Circuit District Attorney's Office, 133 Montgomery Street, Suite 600, Savannah, Georgia 31401, for Appellee.

Bethel, Justice.

A jury found Tony James Locklear guilty of the malice murder of William Long, concealing a death, and related charges. ¹ On appeal, Locklear challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions. He also argues that the trial court erred by (1) failing to suppress statements made during his custodial interview; (2) denying his motion to suppress certain physical evidence; (3) providing a confusing verdict form to the jury; and (4) refusing to grant a mistrial after the prosecutor made improper comments during closing arguments. Because the evidence was clearly sufficient to support Locklear's convictions and because the trial court committed no reversible error with respect to Locklear's other enumerations of error, we affirm.

1. Locklear first asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. When considering the sufficiency of evidence, we ask "whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime[s] beyond a reasonable doubt." (Emphasis omitted.) Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307, 319 (III) (B), 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).

Viewed in this light, the evidence at trial showed as follows. On the morning of October 13, 2018, 82-year-old William Long left his home for work but did not return that evening and did not answer his phone when family and friends tried to contact him. The next day, with Long still missing, his son, Robert Long, accessed his father's phone records, which showed that Long's last call was made at 8:51 a.m. on October 13. Robert began calling the most recent phone numbers that his father had called, and he reached Locklear, who stated that he had worked for and been fired by Long on four occasions but had contacted Long recently to inquire about more work. Locklear indicated that Long had agreed to hire him and was supposed to pick him up the previous morning but never arrived.

In the meantime, Floyd Williams, Long's friend, decided to look for Long at job sites where Long had recently worked. Williams, accompanied by his grandson, soon located Long's truck with Locklear asleep inside. While Williams’ grandson was peeking in the truck's window, Locklear awoke and drove off, nearly hitting Williams’ grandson in the process. Williams and his grandson gave chase, followed the truck for about ten minutes, lost it briefly, and then found it abandoned in a residential area with its door open and the key still in the ignition. Williams contacted police during the pursuit, and responding officers found Locklear about ten feet from the truck hiding behind a tree and holding a small knife to his own neck. After being detained, Locklear told officers that he intended to "end it all" and expected to spend the rest of his life in prison. The officers then transported Locklear to the police station.

During a custodial interview, Locklear, who was homeless and had been camping in a wooded area, described the events leading to Long's death and told police where to find Long's body. According to Locklear, he "ha[s] blackouts sometimes," and, although he could not remember anything about the incident when he first awoke on the morning of October 14, his memories had started to return. Locklear claimed that Long "put his hands on [Locklear] and pulled [Locklear's] pants down," which, he said, caused him to blackout. Locklear reported discovering Long's body near his campsite. Police later learned that Locklear left a voicemail for his son and daughter-in-law the morning of October 14, explaining that he "need[ed] [them] bad" and had "f**ked up."

Officers located Long's body in a wooded area about 50 yards from Locklear's tent. The body had been rolled in a plastic tarp, placed in a sleeping bag, and wrapped in trash bags with twine tied around the head and feet; debris had been heaped on the body. Police obtained a warrant to search Locklear's tent and, inside, found the same twine used to bind Long's body, as well as a knife that appeared blood-stained and on which Long's DNA was later identified. The autopsy revealed that Long had suffered 21 sharp and blunt force injuries — mostly to his head and neck — the totality of which resulted in his death. It appeared from the autopsy that one wound was inflicted by a screwdriver, and police located a screwdriver during a subsequent search of Locklear's tent.

Locklear's theory of defense at trial was that he acted in self-defense after Long attempted to commit a forcible felony — aggravated oral sodomy — against him. Locklear did not testify or offer any evidence in support of his defense and instead relied solely on his statements made during the custodial interview. The evidence recounted above was plainly sufficient to sustain Locklear's convictions as a matter of constitutional due process. See Jackson , 443 U. S. at 319 (III) (B), 99 S.Ct. 2781. Locklear's arguments to the contrary are unavailing.

Locklear first argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for malice murder because, he says, the State did not produce any evidence to contradict his claim of self-defense. He also contends that, even if his actions did not rise to the level of self-defense, the evidence showed that he acted in a heat of passion and that he should have been found guilty of voluntary manslaughter, rather than malice murder. "But questions about the existence of justification are for a jury to decide," Corley v. State , 308 Ga. 321, 322 (1) (a), 840 S.E.2d 391 (2020), as are questions about the sufficiency of provocation to support a verdict of voluntary manslaughter, see McNair v. State , 296 Ga. 181, 182 (1), 766 S.E.2d 45 (2014). And contrary to Locklear's contention, the State presented significant evidence contradicting his self-serving version of events, including evidence showing that Locklear used both a knife and a screwdriver to stab the 82-year-old Long 21 times and subsequently took extensive measures to conceal Long's body. See Martin v. State , 306 Ga. 538, 541 (1), 832 S.E.2d 402 (2019) (evidence that appellant "took extreme measures to destroy and conceal evidence" undermined his claim of self-defense); Ferguson v. State , 297 Ga. 342, 344 (1), 773 S.E.2d 749 (2015) (jury was authorized to reject appellant's unrebutted testimony that he acted in self-defense, especially in light of "evidence that appear[ed] at odds with [appellant's] account, as, for example, the sheer number of stab wounds sustained by [the victim], which is indicative of an aggressive attack rather than defensive maneuverings").

Turning to the conviction for concealing a death, Locklear argues that, because he told police where to find Long's body, he did not hinder discovery of Long's murder. ² But the evidence showed that Locklear went to great lengths to conceal Long's death: Long's body was found in a wooded area, about 50 feet from the wood line, wrapped in a sleeping bag and plastic tarp, tied with twine, and covered with trash, and investigating officers found blood spatter on trees about 15 yards from where Long's body was located, indicating that the body was moved. In addition, when contacted by Long's son, Locklear prevaricated, indicating that he had not seen Long, despite knowing both where Long was and that he was dead. That Locklear eventually told police where to find Long's body does not negate the fact that Locklear concealed Long's death when he "hindered discovery" of the facts that Long "was dead and was the victim of an unlawful homicide." White v. State , 287 Ga. 713, 716-717 (1) (c), 699 S.E.2d 291 (2010) (sufficient evidence supported conviction for concealing death of another where appellant removed victim's body from site where she was killed and falsely told victim's children and police that victim was missing when he knew she was dead). The evidence at trial was more than sufficient to support Locklear's convictions for malice murder and concealing the death of another.

2. Locklear next asserts that the trial court erred by failing to suppress incriminating statements made during his custodial interview at the police station, which he says were made after he invoked his right to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. To establish that he invoked his right to remain silent, Locklear points to body-camera footage taken at the location where he was detained that shows an officer asking Locklear, who was handcuffed in the backseat of a police car, how he obtained Long's truck and Locklear responding, "Bill c[a]me by yesterday, okay, that's as far as I'm going with it." This claim fails.

The record shows that Locklear filed a pre-trial motion to suppress statements he made after first being detained by police and later during the custodial interview at the police station on the grounds that police questioned him without giving him the warnings required by Miranda³ and that he invoked his right to remain...