307 Ga. 441
FINAL COPY
S19A1146. HOLMES v. THE STATE.
BOGGS, Justice.
Ronnie Darnell Holmes challenges his 2015 convictions for
felony murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting
death of Terry Mack. Holmes argues that the trial court erred in
denying his motion for directed verdict on the armed robbery charge
underlying his felony murder conviction and his felony murder
conviction, and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move
to sever his trial from that of his co-defendant, Michael Tyrone
Woods. We affirm.1
1 Mack was killed on April 11, 2013. On May 7, 2014, a Dougherty County
grand jury indicted Holmes and Woods on two counts of felony murder, armed
robbery, two counts of possessing a firearm during the commission of a felony,
and two counts of aggravated assault. Holmes was also indicted on two counts
of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The joint trial of Holmes and
Woods started on August 17, 2015, but before jury selection, Holmes’ felon-inpossession charges were bifurcated for hearing after the other charges. In
addition, Woods entered a guilty plea to a previously unfiled accusation for
selling cocaine, in exchange for the State’s promises not to seek a sentence of
imprisonment and to dismiss the charges against him in connection with the
shooting; the trial court sentenced Woods to 17 years’ probation. The trial
1. (a) Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdicts,
the evidence presented at trial showed the following: On the night
of April 11, 2013, Mack sat in his red SUV in front of an apartment
complex in Albany where Woods, his partner in the crack-cocaine
trade, lived with his then-girlfriend Lashan Lumpkin. Mack and
Woods were known drug dealers, and Woods’ apartment was located
in a reputed high-crime area. That night, Mack and Woods assumed
their usual positions: Mack sat in his SUV and waited for customers
proceeded against Holmes alone until August 21, 2015, when the jury found
him guilty of all charges except the bifurcated counts of possession of a firearm
by a convicted felon. After the jury returned its verdicts, Holmes pleaded guilty
to the two felon-in-possession counts, admitting that he had previously been
convicted of at least one felony offense and that he possessed a .22-caliber
revolver and a .25-caliber pistol on separate occasions on April 13, 2013. On
September 10, 2015, the trial court sentenced Holmes to serve life in prison
without parole for felony murder predicated on armed robbery, five years
consecutive for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and
five years consecutive for the felon-in-possession convictions, set to run
concurrently with each other but consecutive to the sentences for the other
convictions. Moreover, even though the trial court merged the guilty verdict for
felony murder predicated on aggravated assault into one of the aggravated
assault verdicts, that felony murder verdict was vacated by operation of law
because the trial court entered a conviction and sentence on the guilty verdict
for felony murder predicated on armed robbery. See Noel v. State, 297 Ga. 698,
700 (2) (
777 SE2d 449) (2015). On September 3, 2015, Holmes filed a motion
for new trial, which he amended with new counsel on March 6, 2018. After an
evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the motion on March 7, 2019.
Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and the case was docketed in this
Court to the August 2019 term and submitted for decision on the briefs.
2
to arrive, while Woods sat on his porch several feet away, with a
clear view of Mack’s SUV and the surrounding area.
Shortly after 11:00 p.m., Sheila Dunn, a frequent customer,
walked toward Mack’s SUV intending to buy some crack. On her
way, she saw an unknown male walk from the driver’s side of Mack’s
SUV into an alley across the street. D’Marquis Williams, Mack’s
nephew and Woods’ next-door neighbor, was sitting in another SUV
playing very loud music in the parking lot in front of the same
apartment complex. Once Dunn arrived at Mack’s SUV, she found
him inside and tried to speak to him, but he did not answer. She
noticed that he had blood on his shirt and yelled out to Woods —
who was still sitting on his porch mere feet away looking at his
smartphone — for help. Woods came over to the vehicle, and the two
realized that Mack was not moving or responding. He appeared to
have been shot in the face. Woods called 911 at 11:37 p.m.
The police arrived on the scene minutes later. Mack was then
taken to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead. According
to the medical examiner, Mack died from a single .38 caliber gunshot
3
wound to the face. Although Mack was known to carry cocaine and
large amounts of cash, the police found only a $10 bill in his pocket.
Williams testified that on the night of the shooting, he was
sitting in his Suburban playing music yards away from Mack’s SUV
when he heard a gunshot, ducked, and then looked up to see Holmes,
a convicted felon whom he knew well from the neighborhood,
running away from the driver’s side of Mack’s SUV. Lumpkin
testified that Woods told her that, on the night of the shooting,
Holmes told Woods that he intended to rob Mack and that Holmes
shot Mack. Woods also testified at trial, stating that Mack was
known to carry large amounts of cash with him. A woman who lived
near Woods said that on the night of the shooting, Holmes came to
her house to play cards and brought “a wad of money” with him.
(b) Holmes argues that the trial court erred in denying his
motion for directed verdict at the close of the State’s case as to the
armed robbery count and the felony murder count predicated on
armed robbery, because the evidence was insufficient to prove that
he took anything from Mack. We disagree.
4
The test established in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319
(III) (B) (
99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979), is the proper test for us
to use when a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence arises from
the denial of a motion for directed verdict. See Humphrey v. State,
252 Ga. 525, 527 (1) (
314 SE2d 436) (1984). Under that test, we view
all of the evidence presented at trial in the light most favorable to
the verdicts 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. Jackson,
443 U.S. at 319 (III) (B). And as
relevant here, “[a] person commits the offense of armed robbery
when, with intent to commit theft, he or she takes property of
another from the person or the immediate presence of another by
use of an offensive weapon . . . .” OCGA § 16-8-41.
In this case, a rational jury could conclude from the evidence
presented at trial and summarized above that on the night of the
shooting, Holmes went to Woods’ residence; told Woods that he was
about to rob Mack; approached Mack’s SUV, where Mack was selling
crack cocaine; shot Mack in the face; took cash from Mack, leaving
5
only a $10 bill; and then fled on foot. Therefore, the trial court did
not err in denying Holmes’ motion for a directed verdict on the
armed robbery charge and the associated felony murder count. See
White v. State, 287 Ga. 208, 209 (1) (
695 SE2d 222) (2010).
(c) Holmes does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence
to support his conviction for possession of a firearm during the
commission of a felony. Nevertheless, in accordance with this
Court’s usual practice in direct appeals in murder cases, we have
reviewed the record and conclude that, when properly viewed in the
light most favorable to the judgments of conviction entered by the
trial court, the evidence presented at trial and summarized above
was sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find Holmes guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt of that offense. See Abney v. State, 306
Ga. 448, 452 (1) (
831 SE2d 778) (2019).
2. Next, Holmes argues that trial counsel was ineffective for
failing to move the trial court to sever his trial from that of Woods.
To prevail on this claim, Holmes must demonstrate that counsel’s
performance was professionally deficient and that counsel’s
6
deficient performance prejudiced him. See Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (III), 694 (III) (B) (
104 SCt 2052, 80
LE2d 674) (1984). Holmes has failed to meet this high burden, for
the simple reason that he and Woods were not actually tried
together. See Feliciana v. United States, 990 F2d 1257 (9th Cir.
1993) (unpublished) (trial counsel not ineffective for failing to move
to sever defendant’s trial from that of co-defendants because they
pleaded guilty). Accordingly, we affirm Holmes’ convictions.
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
DECIDED NOVEMBER 18, 2019.
Murder. Dougherty Superior Court. Before Judge Lockette.
Conger & Smith, Gregory D. Smith, for appellant.
7
Gregory W. Edwards, District Attorney, Melinda A. Wynne,
Assistant District Attorney; Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General,
Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula K.
Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Vanessa T. Sassano,
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
8
