Fulcher v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia · 2015 · Criminal Law

Criminal LawSufficiency of the EvidenceVoluntary Manslaughter Jury InstructionsMistrialProsecutorial Closing Argumentplain errorvoluntary manslaughterjury charge

Facts

Appellant lived with Isis Scurry and had a child with her, and Scurry also had a sexual relationship with the victim. Scurry testified that appellant had previously threatened to kill her and the victim if she did not leave the victim alone, and that appellant and the victim had a verbal altercation the day before the shooting. On the night of the killing, appellant went to a party the victim was attending, waited in the woods behind the yard, and shot the victim in the head at close range before fleeing. A witness identified appellant, the gun was recovered from a pond after appellant discarded it, and ballistics matched that gun to the bullet removed from the victim.

Issue

Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, whether the trial court plainly erred by failing to give an unrequested voluntary manslaughter instruction, and whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a mistrial after the prosecutor's closing argument allegedly shifted the burden of proof to the defense.

Rule

Evidence is sufficient if, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, it authorizes a rational trier of fact to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. When no voluntary manslaughter charge is requested, the defendant must affirmatively show plain error, including that the omission probably affected the outcome; no such charge is required absent evidence that the killing resulted solely from a sudden, violent, and irresistible passion caused by serious provocation sufficient to excite such passion in a reasonable person. A mistrial is committed to the trial court's discretion, and denial will stand unless a mistrial is essential to preserve the right to a fair trial; a curative instruction may remedy alleged burden-shifting comments.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Macon, Devon Price learned months earlier that his longtime girlfriend had also been seeing Nolan Reed. After a heated phone exchange with Nolan the day before, Devon hid behind a dumpster outside a nightclub and shot Nolan as Nolan walked to his car. Devon did not request a voluntary manslaughter instruction at trial.

On appeal, Devon argues the trial judge plainly erred by failing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter sua sponte. What is the best answer?

Explanation. When no voluntary manslaughter charge is requested, the defendant must affirmatively show plain error, including that the omission probably affected the outcome. A charge is not required unless there is evidence that the killing resulted solely from a sudden, violent, and irresistible passion caused by serious provocation sufficient to excite such passion in a reasonable person. Here, months of knowledge, a prior-day dispute, and lying in wait show reflection rather than sudden passion, so the omission was not plain error. (Derived from Fulcher v. State (n.d.).)