Ellis v. State

Contrary to defendant's contention, trial counsel did object to the state's evidence of the defendant's other bad acts after the defendant placed his character in issue.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A jury found Corey Ellis guilty of two counts of malice murder, four counts of felony murder, two counts of aggravated assault, two counts of armed robbery and one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The trial court entered judgments of conviction and sentenced Ellis to consecutive terms of life imprisonment for the malice murders and five years for the weapons charge. The felony murder verdicts were vacated by operation of law and the trial court merged the remaining counts into the malice murder counts. Ellis appeals after the denial of a motion for new trial. 1. Construed most strongly in support of the verdicts, the evidence shows that Ellis arranged to sell illegal drugs to Lamar Francis and Ernest Wilson. The men met at an abandoned lumberyard, where Ellis, using a handgun, took money from Francis and Wilson, and shot and killed them. The evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Ellis guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979.

2. Ellis claims that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to inadmissible evidence concerning other bad acts. In order to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington , 466 U. S. 668 104 SC 2052, 80 LE2d 674 1984, Ellis ” ‘must prove both that his trial counsel’s performance was deficient and that there is a reasonable probability that the trial result would have been different if not for the deficient performance. Cit.’ Cit.” Hill v. State , 284 Ga. 521, 522 2 668 SE2d 673 2008. ” ‘On appeal, this Court accepts the trial court’s findings of fact, unless they are clearly erroneous. However, the trial court’s legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. Cit.’ Cit.” King v. State , 282 Ga. 505, 506 2 651 SE2d 711 2007.

Ellis v. State

Contrary to defendant's contention, trial counsel did object to the state's evidence of the defendant's other bad acts after the defendant placed his character in issue.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report