Lewis v. State

The trial court was not required to sua sponte order a competency hearing before trying a 14-year-old as an adult on malice murder charges, since nothing the defendant did at trial suggested that he was not competent.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Appellant Michael Lewis appeals his conviction for malice murder,1 resulting in a life sentence. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the trial court erred by: 1 allowing the prosecutor to make statements of prejudicial matters that were not in evidence; 2 allowing certain hearsay testimony concerning police officers’ investigation of the victim’s murder; and 3 giving a jury charge that was subsequently disapproved by this Court. In light of the overwhelming evidence of appellant’s guilt which included testimony by six witnesses to the crime, we conclude it is highly unlikely that these errors contributed to the jury’s verdict. Therefore, we conclude that the errors were harmless. Having found appellant’s remaining enumerations to be without merit, we affirm. In January 1997, the victim, Darrell Woods, was riding in a car driven by his wife, with his two young sons in the back seat. The family stopped at an Atlanta convenience store, and Woods’s wife went into the store while he waited in the car with his children. Appellant Lewis, who was then 13 years old, approached the car and exchanged words with Woods. Appellant then produced a rifle and shot Woods two times at point-blank range, killing him as his children watched. The murder weapon and identifying clothes were later discovered at appellant’s mother’s residence. Appellant then age 14 was tried as an adult under OCGA § 15-11-28 b 2 B, which vests the superior court with jurisdiction over children between the ages of 13 and 17 who are charged with certain crimes, including murder.

1. Having reviewed the record, we conclude the evidence was sufficient for rational triers of fact to find appellant guilty of murder.2

Lewis v. State

The trial court was not required to sua sponte order a competency hearing before trying a 14-year-old as an adult on malice murder charges, since nothing the defendant did at trial suggested that he was not competent.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report