Poole v. State

312 Ga. 515

863 S.E.2d 93

POOLE

v.The STATE.

S21A1103

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Decided: September 21, 2021

Titus Thomas Nichols, Nichols Law, P.C., 4355 Cobb Parkway, SE, Suite J, Atlanta, Georgia 30339, for Appellant.

Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula Khristian Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Leslie Anna Coots, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, 40 Capitol Square, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30334, Sherry Boston, District Attorney, Elizabeth Haase Brock, A.D.A., Dekalb County District Attorney's Office, 556 North McDonough Street, Suite 700, Decatur, Georgia 30030, for Appellee.

Colvin, Justice.

Following a jury trial, Nashea Poole was convicted of felony murder and related offenses in connection with crimes committed against Jordan and Chad Collins.¹ Poole raises numerous claims alleging that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support her convictions. We affirm.

As recounted by this Court in Butler v. State , 310 Ga. 892, 855 S.E.2d 551 (2021), the evidence presented at the joint jury trial showed as follows:

Late in the evening on August 31, 2016, the Collins brothers were at the home of their sister in Lithonia, where they were visited by Clarissa McGhee and Nashea Poole, whom Jordan had met through the "Plenty of Fish" dating website. According to Chad, McGhee and Poole gave "unusual" responses when asked about where they lived, and they were noticeably inquisitive about the layout of the house, trying at one point to go upstairs. The women also went outside several times, expressing curiosity about the dog in the backyard, and were on their phones texting throughout the visit. After approximately an hour, Jordan decided to take the women to his house and prepared to leave.

Shortly thereafter, Chad heard the back screen door slam, followed by a commotion and a male voice saying, "chill out" or "watch out." Chad then heard a gunshot and ran outside, where he saw Jordan lying on the patio. Chad was then shot several times. He made his way to the garage, where he found McGhee. Chad yelled at [McGhee] and began chasing [McGhee], who pulled out a gun, pointed it at Chad, and then fled. Chad survived, but Jordan died of his wounds. Chad testified that neither he nor his brother had any weapons at their sister's home and that, to his knowledge, their sister did not keep any weapons there, either.

According to the medical examiner, Jordan's wounds were inflicted by a combination of shots fired from a shotgun and a handgun. This finding was corroborated by the recovery at the scene of both .22-caliber shell casings ejected from a handgun and a single shell casing from a shotgun. An investigating officer testified that one person cannot hold and fire both a shotgun and another gun at the same time. No weapons were found at the scene.

McGhee, who pled guilty to aggravated assault, testified for the State as follows: In July or August of 2016, Poole introduced her to Butler and Avery, who were high-ranking members of the Bloods gang. McGhee began dating Avery and joined the Bloods; Poole was a member of the gang as well. During this timeframe, Poole created a Plenty of Fish account for McGhee for the purpose of "escorting," which McGhee described as "basically like prostitution."

On the evening of the crimes, McGhee went to Butler's house. Avery and Poole were there, and the women made preparations to meet an escorting client. When Poole and McGhee arrived at the planned location, however, they became uncomfortable with the situation and left. The women met back up with Butler and Avery at a gas station and decided to go meet Jordan, whose photograph they showed to Butler and Avery. Avery gave McGhee a gun to take with her.

McGhee and Poole drove to Lithonia, with Avery and Butler following them for "protection." By the time the women arrived at the home, Avery and Butler had disappeared. At the home, McGhee and Poole sat talking with Jordan and Chad, at one point going to the backyard to give the dog some water and then returning inside. Shortly thereafter, the dog began barking, and, when Jordan and Poole stepped outside, shots rang out. Chad ran outside, and McGhee retreated to the garage. After a few minutes, Chad ran into the garage, angrily demanding to know "who the f*** brought you over here." McGhee pulled out the gun, and Chad backed off. As McGhee ran outside, she heard more gunshots and saw Avery standing in the yard with a gun. McGhee and Poole got into McGhee's car and left, and Avery ran away. McGhee testified that she did not see Butler.

According to McGhee, she and Poole then went back to Butler's house. Avery and Butler were there, and in the house McGhee noticed two guns, one of which she identified as a shotgun. The women demanded to know what had happened, and Butler eventually responded, "he tried to grab the gun and got shot." Avery warned McGhee not to call the police, or she would "be the one that got blamed for it all."

In addition to the foregoing evidence, the State introduced the testimony of two law enforcement officers who were qualified as experts on criminal street gangs. One of these officers testified that Butler was known to be a founding member of the "Luciano Bloods," a subset of the national Bloods gang with its own organized structure and lengthy track record of violent crime. This officer testified that the Luciano Bloods use prostitution as "the main money maker for the gang" and have been known to use online platforms to lure "johns," under the pretense of prostitution services, for the purpose of robbing them. The other officer testified that, in investigating the crimes at issue here, he had uncovered gang-related messages posted by Butler on social media, gang-related text messages extracted from Avery's cell phone, and photographs posted on social media depicting both men wearing Bloods-associated clothing and flashing Bloods gang signs.^[2]

The State also presented evidence that, during a time span closely coinciding with the shootings, a cell phone used by Butler was used to communicate with Avery's and Poole's cell phones. In addition, cell tower records showed that, in the hours encompassing the shootings, the phones associated with Butler, Avery, and Poole moved from the area near Butler's College Park home to the area near the Lithonia crime scene and back again. Butler and Avery each stipulated to being a convicted felon at the time of the shootings.

Id. at 893-895, 855 S.E.2d 551.

Poole contends that the evidence presented at trial was constitutionally insufficient to sustain her convictions pursuant to Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 (III) (B), 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), because the State failed to show that she was a party to a crime, the State failed to show that the crimes were committed with the intent to further gang interests, and because her convictions were based solely upon uncorroborated accomplice testimony. Poole also argues that the evidence of her guilt was entirely circumstantial and did not rule out other, "more reasonable" explanations for the events that occurred on the night of the crimes. We disagree.

When evaluating the sufficiency of evidence as a matter of constitutional due process, "the relevant question is 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 beyond a reasonable doubt." (Emphasis omitted.) Jackson , 443 U. S. at 319 (III) (B), 99 S.Ct. 2781. "This Court does not reweigh evidence or resolve conflicts in testimony; instead, evidence is reviewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, with deference to the jury's assessment of the weight and credibility of the evidence." (Punctuation omitted.) Hayes v. State , 292 Ga. 506, 506, 739 S.E.2d 313 (2013).

Poole claims that the evidence was legally insufficient to support her felony murder conviction because the State failed to prove that she was a party to the underlying felony of aggravated assault. But "criminal intent is a question for the jury, and it may be inferred from that person's conduct before, during, and after the commission of the crime." Jones v. State , 292 Ga. 656, 658 (1) (a), 740 S.E.2d 590 (2013). Also, "[w]hile 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." (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Parks v. State , 304 Ga. 313, 315-316 (1) (a), 818 S.E.2d 502 (2018). Finally, "[t]he intent of the actual killer may be imputed to the other active members of the conspiracy even though the homicide may not have been a part of the original common design." Williams v. State , 276 Ga. 384, 385, 578 S.E.2d 858 (2003).

Here, the State presented sufficient evidence that Poole was a party to the crimes charged. As this Court observed in Butler , supra, at (1) (a), 855 S.E.2d 551 :

The evidence presented at trial showed, among other things, that: McGhee and Poole had connected with the victims through a dating website they used for prostitution and made plans to meet with them on the night of the crimes; Butler and Avery, both convicted felons, met with McGhee and Poole before the women left to meet the victims, gave McGhee a gun, and followed them to their meeting; during their visit with the victims, McGhee and Poole acted strangely, were markedly curious about the layout of the house, went outside several times, and were frequently texting on their phones; Avery was present at the crime scene with a gun during the shootings; McGhee [and Poole] went to Butler's house after the shootings and [McGhee] saw Avery and Butler there with two guns, one of which was a shotgun; when questioned about the shootings, Butler responded that someone "got shot" because "

...