In th e S u p re m e Co u rt o f Ge o rg ia

De c id e d: Ju ly 5 , 2 0 1 6

S 1 6 A0 3 5 4 . BLACKLEDGE v . THE S TATE.

B L ACKW EL L , Ju stic e

.

Alo n g with se v e ra l c o -d e fe n d a nts, Milto n Bla c k le d g e wa s trie d b y a Co b b

Co u n ty ju ry a

n d c o n v i c t ed o f m

u rd e r, v io la tio n o f th e Ge o rg ia S tre e t Ga n g

Te rro rism a n d P re v e n tio n Ac t (th e “S tre e t Ga n g Ac t” ), 1 a nd o th e r c rim e s, a ll in

c o n n e c tio n with th e k illin g of Ju stin Bro wn

. B l a c k l e d g e a p p e a l s , c o nte n d in g th a t

th e e v id e n c e is in su ffic ie n t to su sta in h is c o n v ic tio n fo r v io la tio n o f th e S tre e t

Ga n g Ac t, th a t th e tria l c o urt e rre d w h e n it re fu se d to se ve r h is tria l fro m th a t o f

h is c o -d e fe n d a n ts, a n d th a t th e tria l c o u rt e rre d wh e n it a dm itte d c e rta in

e v id e n c e . We fin d n o e rro r a n d a ffirm

. 2

1 OCGA § 16-15-1 et seq.

2 Brown w as killed on August 2, 2007. B lackledg e , D a v i d Hay es, M iracle Nwakanm a, Louis Francis, a n d M u ham m ed Abdus–Salaam were i ndicted on Decem b er 2 1, 2007, and

each was charged with m alice m urder, three c o unts o f f elony m ur d e r , o n e c ount of conspiracy to com m it a rm e d robbery

, f our counts o f a g g ravated a s sault, one count of

violation of the Street Gang Act, and one count of unlawf ul p ossession o f a f

irearm during

the com m ission of a crim e. In addition, Hay es and Nwakanm a were charged with unlawf ul possession of a f

irearm by a c o n v i c t ed f

e lon and f

elony m urder predicated on unlawf ul1

. Vie we d in th e lig h t m o st fa v o ra ble to th e v e rd ic t, th e e v id e nc e sh o w s

th a t o n th e e v e n in g o f Au g ust 1

, 2 0 0 7

, Bla c k le d g e , Da v id Ha y e s, Mira c le

Nwa k an m a , Lo u is F ra n c is, a n d Mu h a m m e d Ab d u s-S a la a m m a de p la ns to ro b

Dy la n W a tt e c a m

p s, wh o re c e n tly h a d b e e n in v o lv e d in a d isp u te with Ab d u sS a la a m c o n c e rn in g a sa le o f m a riju a n a

. Ea rly o n t h e m o rn in g o f Au g u st 2

,

Ha y e s g a v e Nwa k a nm a a .3 8 0 c a lib e r p isto l (wh ic h Nwa k a nm a la te r g a v e to

F ra n c is), a n d Bla c k le d ge d ro v e Nwa k a nm a , F ra n c is, a n d A b d u s-S a la a m to th e

possession of a f

irearm by a convicted f

elon. Francis also was charged with poss e s s i on of

cocaine and possession o f less than one ounce of m arijuana, but those ch a r g es w ere later

dead d ocketed. T he prosecution elected to try Abdus-Salaam separately

, and it def erred his

trial until a later date, af

ter his co-def

endants w ere tried; he eventually entered a plea of guilty to reduced charges. Beginning on May 4

, 2009, Blackledge, Hay es, Nwakanm a, and

Fr a n c i s were tried by a s ingle j ury

. The trial court directed a verdict o f acquittal f or each

d e f e n dant on one count of aggravated assault, and the jury returned its verdict o n May 2 0

, 2009, f inding Blackledge, Hay es, Nwakanm a, and Francis e a c h g u ilty of t he rem aining

counts, except m alice m

u rder. On June 24, 2009, Blackledge was sentenced to i m prisonm ent
f or lif e f or the f elony m urder of Brown predicated on an a g gravated assault upon Brown, a

concurrent term of im

prisonm ent f

or ten y ears f

o r c o n s p i r acy to com m it arm ed robbery

, a consecutive term of im

prisonm ent f

or twenty y ears f

or aggravated a ssault upon Scott Keller,

a consecutive t erm of im prisonm ent f

or ten y ears f

o r aggravated a s sault u p o n J o s h

W a shington, a concurrent t erm of im prisonm ent f

or f if t een y ears f

or v iolation of the Street Gang Act, and a consecutive term of im p risonm ent f

or f ive y ears f

or unlawf ul possession of

a f irearm during the com m ission of a crim e

. T h e v erdicts as to the other counts of f elony

m urder were vacated by o p eration of law, Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 3 69, 371-372 (4) (434

SE2d 479) (1993), and the rem aining aggravated assault upon B rown m erged with the f elony

m urder. Blackledge tim e ly f iled a m otion f

o r new trial on June 25, 2009, and he am ended it

on January 19, 2012 and February 17, 2012. The trial c o u r t denied his m otion o n May 8, 2013, and Blackledge tim ely f iled a notice of appe a l o n M a y 1 0, 2 013. T he case was docketed in this Court f

or the January

2016 term

and subm itted f

or decision on the brief

s.

2S m

y rn a a p a rtm e n t c o m

p le x in wh ic h Wa tte c a m ps liv e d

. Ha y e s dro v e th e re

se p a ra te ly in his p ic k

u p tru c k

, a rra n g e d e ntry fo r th e o th e r fo u r m e n th ro u g h a

re sid e n t th a t h e k n e w , pa rk e d h is tru c k a c ro ss th e stre e t fro m th e e n try ga te

, a n d

wa ite d th e re a s th e o th e rs e n te re d th e a pa rtm e n t c o m

p le x

. Bla c k le d g e p ark e d h is

c a r n e a r W a tte c a m

p s’s a p a rtm e n t, a n d Bla c k le dg e a n d h is p a sse n g e rs e x ite d th e

c a r, with Bla c k le d g e a

n d N wa k a n m a c a rry in g silv e r se m i-a u to m a tic h a n d g u n s.

Un b e no wn st to th e wo u ld -b e ro b b e rs, Wa tte c a m p s wa s ha v in g a p a rty in

h is a p a rtm e n t, a n d a s B la c k le d g e a n d h is th re e p a sse n g e rs a p p ro a c h e d th e d o o r,

a g u e st c a m e o ut, a n d Bla c k le d g e h it h im in th e fa c e

. Th e fo u r m e n th e n r a n

a wa y , pu rsu e d b y W a tte c a m ps a n d se v e ra l o f his g u e sts. Bro wn , S c ott Ke lle r,

a n d Jo sh Wa sh in g to n , wh o we re wa lk in g to th e pa rty

, h e a rd W a tte c a m p s y e ll

“ g e t th e m ,” a nd th e y b e ga n to c h a se th e fo u r m e n

. B la c k le d g e an d Fra nc is th e n

fire d se v e ra l sh o ts a t Bro wn , Ke lle r , a n d W a sh in g to n , o n e o f wh ic h fa ta lly

wo u nd e d Bro w n

. Bla c kle d g e a n d h is frie n d s we re a b le to c lim

b o v e r a fe n c e a n d

e sc a p e in Ha y e s’s tru c k

. Bo th F r a n c is a nd Bla c k le d ge c la im e d to h a v e sh o t

Bro w n , an d Ha y e s d ro v e e v e ry o n e to Ab d u s-S a la a m ’s a p a rtm e n t. S ix m a tc h in g

.3 8 0 c a lib e r sh e ll c a s i n g s a n d th re e .3 8 0 c a lib e r p ro je c tile s, in c lu d in g th e o n e

th a t fa ta lly wo u n d e d Bro wn , we re re c o v e re d

. All o f th e sh e ll c a sin g s c a m e fro m

3th e sa m e g u n , a n d two o f th e p ro

je c tile s, in c lu d in g th e o n e th a t k ille d B r o w n ,

we re fire d fro m th e sa m e p isto l. Wh e n qu e stio n e d b y in v e stig a to rs, Bla c k le d g e

in itia lly d e n ie d a ny in v o lv e m e n t a n d p ro vid e d an a lib i, b u t h e la te r a d m itte d th a t

h e wa s p re se nt a t th e a

p a r t me n t c o m

p le x a t th e tim e th a t B ro w n wa s sh o t. We

p re v io u sly c o n sid e re d th e e vid e n c e in th is c a s e wh e n we h e ard a p p e a ls b y

Nwa k an m a , F ra n c i s , a

n d H a y e s , w h o s e c o n v i c t i o n s w e a f f irm e d

. S e e Nwa k a nm a

v

. S ta te

, 2 9 6 Ga

. 4 9 3

, 4 9 4 -4 9 5 (1 ) (7 68 S E2 d 5 0 3 ) (2 0 1 5 ); H a y e s v

. S ta te

, 2 9 8

Ga

. 3 3 9 (7 8 1 S E2 d 7 7 7 ) (2 0 1 6 ). We n o w c o nsid e r th is e vid e n c e a n e w with

re sp e c t to Bla c k le d g e

.

Bla c k le d ge c la im s th a t th e e v id e n c e is le g a l l y i n su ffic ie n t to su sta in h is

c o n v ic tio n fo r v io la tio n o f th e S tre e t Ga n g Ac t. 3 In Nwa k a n ma , we in d ic a te d

3 Blackledge also com

p lains that the evidence is insuf f icient t o sustain a conviction

f or f elony m urder in the com m ission of a v iolation of the Street Gang Act, but Blackledge

was n ot sentenced f

or that c rim e, a nd no judgm ent of conviction as to that crim e was entered against h im because the v erdict as to that f elony m urder count was vacated by operation of

law. See note 2, s upra. Accordingly

, Blackledge’s cl aim that the evidence is legally

insuf f icient to sustain a conviction f or the vacated f

elony m urder i s m oot. See Hay es, 298 Ga. at 340, n. 2. Notably

, Blackledge does n ot dispute t he legal suf f iciency o f the evidence a s to f elony

m urder predicated on the aggravated assault of Brown, conspiracy to com m it a r m ed robbery

, the ag g r a v a t e d assault u pon K eller, the aggravated assault upon W ashington, and the

unlawf ul possession of a f

irearm during the com m ission o f a crim e. W e independently have

reviewed the evidence t hat pertains to those crim es, a n d we are satisf i ed that t he evidence is

suf f i cient to sustain those convictions. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U

. S. 307, 319 (III) (B) (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

4th a t th e e v id e n c e , wh e n v ie we d in th e lig h t m o st fa v o ra b le to th e v e rd ic t,

sh o we d th a t Bla c kle d g e a n d h is th re e c o -d e fe n d a n ts we re a s s o c i a te d with “ a

c rim in a l stre e t g a n g k n o wn a s ‘MP RC 3 0 0 ,’” 2 9 6 G a

. a t 4 9 4 (1 ), a n d we

c o n firm e d th a t fin din g in Ha y e s, 2 9 8 Ga

. a t 3 4 1 (a ). Ou r p re se n t re v ie w o f th e

e v id e n c e , v ie we d in th e sa m e lig h t, c o n firm s th a t th e e v id e n c e wa s su ffic ie n t to

sh o w th a t “ MP RC 3 0 0” wa s a “ c rim in a l stre e t g a n g ,” th a t Bl a c k l e d g e wa s

a sso c ia te d with th a t g a n g , a n d th a t th e p la nn e d ro b b e ry w a s in te n d e d to fu rth e r

th e in te re sts o f th e g a n g

. 4 As a re su lt, th e e v id e n c e a d du c e d a t tria l wa s

su ffic ie n t to a

u th o riz e a ra tio n a l trie r o f fa c t to fin d b e y o n d a re a so n a b le d o u b t

th a t Bla c k le d g e wa s g uilty o f v io la tin g th e S tre e t Ga n g Ac t. S e e J a ck s o n v

.

Virg in ia , 4 4 3 U. S . 3 0 7 , 3 1 9 (III) (B) (9 9 S C t 2 7 8 1 , 6 1 LE2 d 5 60 ) (1 9 7 9 ).

2

. Bla c k le d g e c o n te nd s th a t th e tria l c ou rt e rre d w h e n it d e n ie d h is p re tria l

m o tio n to se v e r h is tria l fr o m t h a t o f Ha y e s, Nwa k an m a , a n d F ra nc is. Wh e n

4 T he evidence that MPRC 300 was a c rim i nal street gang and that the planned robbery was intended to f urther the interests of the gang was described in Hay es, 298 Ga. at
341-343 ( a). The e vidence that Blackledge was associated with that gang includes testim ony that MPRC 300 w as a hy

brid gang that included m em b ers of dif f erent gangs, that B lackledge

adm itted to being associated with the Crips gang, that Blackledge had tattoos that were

com m on to m em

b ers o f gangs, and that

– just bef ore leaving f

or the planned robbery of

W a ttecam

ps – Blackledge participated in a “f reak” during which he and his co-indictees had

sex with the “f

irst lady ” of

the MPRC 300 gang.

5se v e ra l d e fe nd a n ts a re in d ic te d to ge th e r f o r a c a p ita l c rim e , b u t th e S ta te d oe s

n o t se e k th e d e a th p e n a lty

, wh e th e r th e d e fe n d a n ts a re to b e trie d to g e th e r o r

se p a ra te ly is a m a tte r c o m m itte d to th e so u n d d isc re tio n o f th e tria l c o u rt. OCGA

§ 1 7-8 -4 (a ). “ In ru lin g o n a se v e ra n c e m o tio n, th e c o u rt sh o uld c o n sid e r: (1 ) th e

lik e lih o o d o f c o n fu sio n o f th e e v id e n c e a n d la w; (2 ) th e po ssib ility th a t e v id e n c e

a g a in st o n e d e fe n d a

n t m a y b e c o n sid e re d a g a in st th e o th e r d e fe n d a nt; a n d (3 ) th e

p re se nc e o r a

b se n c e o f a nta g o n istic d e fe n se s.” Hic k s v

. S ta te

, 2 9 5 Ga

. 2 6 8

, 2 7 8

(4 ) (7 5 9 S E2 d 5 0 9 ) (2 0 1 4 ) (c ita tio n o m itte d ). An d to re q uire a se v e ra n c e , “ th e

b u rd e n is o n th e d e fe n d a nt re q u e stin g th e se v e ra n c e t o d o mo r e th a n ra ise th e

p o ssib ility th a t a se p a ra te tria l wo u ld g iv e h im a b e tte r c h a n c e o f a c q u itta l. He

m u st m a k e a c le a r sh owin g th a t a jo in t t r i a l w o u ld le a d to pre ju d ic e a n d a

c o n se q u e n t d e n ia l o f du e p ro c e ss.” Th om a s v

. S ta te

, 29 3 Ga

. 82 9, 8 3 0 -8 3 1 (2 )

(7 5 0 S E 2 d 2 9 7 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (c ita tio n a n d p u n c tu a tio n om itte d ). We a lre a d y

c o n sid e re d F ra n c is’s c la im th a t h is c a se sh o uld h a v e b e e n se v e re d

. S e e

Nwa k an m a , 2 96 Ga

. a t 4 9 8 -4 9 9 (3 ). An d ju st a s w e did with re sp e c t to F ra n c is

in his c a se , we c o n c lu d e th a t Bla c kle d ge h a s m a de no “ c le a r sh o win g o f

p re ju d ic e a n d a c on se q ue n t d e n ia l o f d ue p ro c e ss.” T h o m a s, 2 9 3 Ga

. a t 8 3 1 (2 )

(p u n c tu a tio n o m itte d ).

6Bla c k le d ge a rg u e s th a t h e wa s p re ju d ic e d by a jo in t tria l b e c a u se th e ju ry

m ig h t h a v e b e e n c o n fu se d b y th e n um b e r o f c o -d e fe nd an ts. Bu t o nly th re e c o

d e fe n d a n ts we re trie d with Bla c k le d g e , a n d th e la w a n d e v id e n c e th a t a p p lie d to

e a c h o f th e m

we re su b sta n tia lly id e ntic a l. S e e Nwa ka n m a , 2 9 6 Ga

. a t 4 9 8 (3 ).

“ Th e y we re jo in tly trie d fo r a lm o st th e sa m e o ffe nse s, wh ic h in v o lv e d th e sa m e

witn e sse s, wh o se c re d ib ility th e c o -d e fe n d a n ts jo in tly a tta c k e d

, a n d th e S ta te ’s

e v id e n c e in d ic a te d th a t th e y a c te d in c o n c e rt.” Id

. (c ita tio n s o m itte d ). “ In

a d d itio n , th e tria l c o u rt p ro pe rly in stru c te d th e ju ry th a t it wa s to in de p e n d e n tly

d e te rm in e th e g u ilt o r i n n o c en c e o f e a c h d e fe n d a n t a s to e a c h c o u n t, a n d th e

c o u rt p ro v id e d se p a ra te v e rd ic t fo rm s fo r e a c h d e fe n da n t in o rd e r to a v o id th e

p o te ntia l fo r c o n fu sio n .” Id . (c ita tio n s o m itte d). Bla c k le d g e a lso c o nte n d s th a t

h e wa s p re

ju dic e d b y th e a dm issio n o f s im ila r tra nsa c tio n e v id e n c e a g a in st

Ha y e s a n d e v id e nc e th a t h is c o -d e fe n d a n ts h a d g a ng a ffilia tio n s. Th a t e vid e n c e ,

h o we v e r, d id no t dire c tly imp l i c a t e Bla c k le d g e , a n d th e tria l c o u rt g a v e

a p p ro p ria te lim itin g in stru c tio n s a b o u t th e p u r p o s e s fo r wh ic h th e ju ry c o u ld

7c o n sid e r th e e v id e n c e o f Ha y e s’s sim ila r tra n sa c tio n a nd th e g a n g a ffilia tio n s.

S e e id

. 5

Bla c k le d ge c la ims th a t h e w a s pre ju d ic e d be c a

use h e a n d h is c o

d e fe n d a n ts p re se n te d a n ta g o n istic d e fe n se s. Bu t th is a rg u m e n t is b e lie d b y th e

re c o rd

, w h ic h sh o ws th a t th e d e fe n se s p re se nte d b y Ha y e s, Nwa k a n m a , a n d

F ra n c is we re , a lm o st e x c lu siv e ly

, su p po rtiv e of Bla c k le dg e

. Wh ile n on e o f th e

c o -d e fe n d a n ts p re se n te d a ny e v id e nc e , th e c lo sin g a rg u m e n t s o n b e h a lf o f

Ha y e s, Nwa k a n m a , an d Fra n c is c on siste n tly a tta c k e d th e c re d ib ility o f th e

S t a t e ’ s w i t

n e s s e s, a n d p a rtic ula rly th e c re d ib ility o f Ab d u s-S a l a a m , w h o t e s t i f

i e d

a g a in st th e o th e r c o -d e fe n da n ts. Bla c k le d g e “h a s c om p le te ly fa ile d to sh o w a n y

sp e c ific pre

ju dic e su c h th a t th e jo in t tria l de n ie d h im d u e p ro c e ss.” N wa k a n m a ,

2 9 6 Ga . a t 4 9 9 (3 ) (c ita tio n s a n d fo o tn o te o m itte d ).

5 Blackledge also argues that he was prejudiced by t he j oint trial b ecause the State was able to i ntroduc e e v idence of a pretrial statem ent m a de b y Francis t hat incrim inated Blackledge. But that s tatem e nt would have been adm issible

– under our old Evidence Code (which applied a t the 2009 trial), see note 7, inf ra – e v e n i f B l ackledge’s trial had been

severed because it was a statem e nt m ade b y a co-conspirator during t he concealm ent phase

of the conspiracy

. See Favors v. S tate, 296 Ga. 842, 844 (2) (770 S E2d 855) (2015) (“once

a conspiracy is shown, statem ents by one co-conspirator during the pendency of the crim inal project are adm i ssible against all”) (citation om itted).

83

. B la c k le d g e c on te n d s th a t th e tria l c o u rt e rre d wh e n it a d m itte d e v id e n c e

th a t h e a lso wa s in vo lv e d i n a N o rth Ca ro lin a m u rd e r. Th a t m

u rd e r wa s

c o m m itte d in O c to b e r 2 0 0 6

, le ss th a n a y e a r b e fo re Bro wn wa s k ille d

. A p o lic e

in v e stig a to r fro m No rth Ca ro lin a te stifie d th a t Bla c k le d g e g a v e a sta te m e n t in

No v e m be r 2 0 0 6 i n w h i c h h e a d m itte d th a t h e a g re e d to driv e a frie nd

— wh o

wa s a m e m

b e r of th e Crip s g a n g — to a n a p a rtm e n t c o m

p le x so th a t h is frie n d

c o u ld e n g a g e in a se x a c t with so m e o ne with wh o m h is frie n d h a d

c o m m u nic a te d o n lin e (a n d wh o m h is frie n d be lie v e d w a s a wo m a n ). Ac c o rd in g

to B la c k le d g e ’s sta te me n t, his frie n d d isc o v e re d d u rin g th e ir driv e th a t th e

p e rs o n h e h a d a rra n g e d to m e e t wa s a m a n , h is frie n d re a c te d a n g rily a n d

e x p re sse d h is d e sire to se e k re trib u tio n , Bla c k le d g e c o n tin u e d to driv e h is frie n d

to th e a pa rtm e n t c o m

p le x , h is frie n d sh o t th e m a n wh o a p p ro a c h e d th e m wh e n

th e y a rriv e d a t th e re n d e z v o u s lo c a tio n , a n d Bla c k le d g e th e n d ro v e his f r i e n d

h o m e fro m

th e c rim e sc e n e

. 6

6 The investigator also testif ied that Blackledge a dm itted that he previously owned a .380 caliber sem i-autom atic handgun.

9Un d e r o u r old Ev id e n c e Co d e , 7 a sim ila r tra n sa c tio n wa s a d m issib le if th e

S ta te sh o we d th a t

( 1 ) i t s ee k s to in tro d u c e th e e v id e n c e n o t to ra ise a n im p ro p e r in fe re n c e a s t o th e a c c u se d ’s c h ara c te r, b u t fo r so m e a p p ro p ria te

p u rp o se wh ic h h a s b e e n d e e m e d to b e a n e x c e p t io n to th e g e n e ra l

ru le o f in a d m issib ility ; (2 ) th e re is su ffic ie n t e v id e nc e to e sta b lish

th a t th e a c c u se d c o m m itte d th e in d e p e n d e n t o ffe n se or a c t; a n d (3 )

th e re is a su ffic ie n t c o n n e c tio n o r sim il a r i t y b e twe e n th e in d e p e n d e n t o ffe n se o r a c t a n d th e c rim e c h a rg e d so th a t p ro o f o f

th e fo rm e r te n d s to p ro v e th e la tte r.

La m a r v

. S ta te

, 2 9 7 Ga

. 8 9

, 9 0 -9 1 (2 ) (7 7 2 S E2 d 6 3 6 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (c ita tio n o m itte d ).

He re , th e tria l c ou rt a d m itte d th e e v id e n c e o f th e No rth Ca ro lin a m u rd e r to sh o w

Bla c k le d g e ’s in te n t a n d “b e n t o f m in d,” a m on g oth e r th in gs. 8 An d it wa s p ro p e r

fo r th e t r i al c o u rt to a d m it e v id e nc e o f th e No rth Ca ro lin a m u rd e r fo r th e se

p u rp o se s g iv e n th a t — in b o th th e No rth Ca ro lin a c a se a n d th e c a se fo r wh ic h

Bla c k le d g e wa s be in g trie d in Co b b Co un ty — Bla c k le d g e g a ve a sta te m e n t to

7 Because his trial took place in 2009, Blackledge was t ried under our old Evidence

Code. See Ga. L. 2011, pp. 9 9, 214, § 101. For trials beginning on or af ter J anuary 1, 2013,

the a d mi s s i b ility o f “[ e]vidence of other crim es, wrongs, or acts” is governed by OCGA §

24-4-404 (b). See W alker-Ma dden v. State,

___ Ga.

___ ( 2), n. 2 (Case No. S16A0324, decided May

9, 2016).

8 As we recently have explained, “bent of m ind” is not a proper purpose f or the

adm ission of other acts evidence under Rule 404 (b) o f the new Evidence Code. See Brooks

v. State, 2 98 Ga. 722, 727 (2) (783 SE2d 895) ( 2016). It was, however, a settled ground f or adm itting sim ilar transaction evidence under the old Evidence Code.

1 0th e p o lic e in wh ic h he a d m itte d h is p re se n c e bu t a tte m p te d t o m in im iz e h is

in v o lv e m e n t. As a re su lt, th e N o rth Ca ro lin a a c ts te n d e d to d isp ro ve a ny n o tio n

th a t Bla c k le d g e wa s ju st in th e wro n g p la c e a t th e wro n g tim e a n d th a t h e d id n o t

in te nd to c o m m it a n y c rim e th a t c re a te d a fo re se e a b le risk th a t so m e on e wo u ld

b e sh o t.

Bla c k le d ge d o e s n ot d isp u te th a t h e d ro v e h is frie n d to an d fro m th e sc e n e

o f th e No rth Ca ro lin a m

u rd e r, b u t h e c la ims t h a t th e No rth Ca ro lin a a c ts a re

d issim ila r fro m th e a c ts h e w a s a lle ge d to h a v e c o m m itte d in Co b b Co u nty

.

Un d e r th e o ld Ev id e n c e Co d e , h o we v e r, th e p ro p e r fo c u s wa s o n th e sim ila ritie s,

n o t th e d iffe re n c e s, b e twe e n th e c rim e s c ha rg e d a n d th e p rio r a c ts. S e e Brite v

.

S ta te

, 27 8 Ga

. 89 3

, 8 9 4 -8 95 (2 ) (6 0 8 S E2 d 2 04 ) (2 0 0 5 ). Ev e n a ssu m in g th a t th e

ju ry b e lie v e d th a t Bla c k le d ge wa s in v o lv e d in th e N o rth Ca ro lin a c a se o n ly to

t h e e x te n t th a t h e a d m itte d in h is sta te m e n t to th e po lic e , ju ro rs c ou ld h a v e

d e te rm in e d th a t h e kn owin gly d r o v e a f r ie n d wh o wa s a k n o wn m e m b e r o f a

g a n g (with wh ic h Bla c k le d g e h im se lf wa s a f filia te d ) so th a t h is frie nd c o u ld

c o m m it a c rim e a n d th a t h e th e n d ro v e h is frie n d h o m e a fte r th e frie n d m u rd e re d

so m e on e

. An d in b o th th e No rth Ca ro l i n a c a se a n d in th is c a se , th e m u rd e r

v ic tim s we re stra n g e rs to B l a c k l e dg e , th e m u rd e rs we re no t p la n n e d we ll in

1 1a d v a n c e , th e m u rd e rs w e re c o m m itte d in a n ap a rtm e n t c o m p le x with

se m i-a uto m a tic h a n d g u n s, a n d th e m o tiv e fo r th e c r i m e s wa s re la te d to a

re la tiv e ly m in o r d isp u te

. Ba se d o n th e se sim ila ritie s, th e tria l c ou rt d id n o t a b use

its d isc re tio n wh e n it c o n c lu d e d th a t th e in c id e n ts we re sim ila r e n o u g h a n d

a d m itte d th e e v id e n c e o f th e No rth Ca ro lin a a c ts. S e e id

.

4

. Bla c k le d g e c la im s th a t th e tria l co u rt e rre d wh e n it a d m itte d

p h o to g ra p h s a n d p h o to g ra

p h ic c a p tio n s th a t h a d be e n po ste d

, th e S ta te a lle g e d

,

o n My Sp a c e p a g e s m a in ta in e d b y Ha y e s a n d F ra n c is. Bla c k le d g e sa y s th a t th is

d o c u m e nta ry e v id e n c e wa s no t p ro p e rly a u th e n tic a te d

, b u t we a lre a d y ha v e h e ld

th a t “[d ] o c u m e n ts fro m e le c tro n ic so urc e s su c h a s th e p rin to uts fro m a we b site

lik e My S p a c e a re su bje c t to th e sa m e ru le s o f au t h e n t i c a tio n a s o th e r m o re

tra d it i o na l d o c um e n ta ry e v id e n c e a n d m a y b e a u th e n tic a te d th ro u g h

c irc u m sta n tia l e v id e n c e .” B u rg e ss v

. S ta te

, 2 9 2 Ga

. 8 2 1, 8 2 3 (4 ) (7 4 2 S E2 d 4 6 4 )

(2 0 1 3 ) (c ita tio n s o m itte d ). He re , a la w e n fo rc e m e n t o ffic e r te s t i f i e d th a t h e

d i s c o v e re d th e My S pa c e p a g e s fo r Ha y e s (u se rn a m e “ Da v id MP RC3 0 0 ” ) a n d

F ra n c is (u se rn a m e “ L u isMP RC3 0 0 ” ) b y u sin g th e ir na m e s, da te s o f b i rth

,

re sid e n tia l ZIP c od e s, a

n d o th e r k n o wn id e ntify in g in fo rm a tio n

. Te stim o n y wa s

p re se n t e d th a t th e p rin to u ts o f th e p h o to g ra ph s a n d c a

p tio n s we re a n a c c u ra te

1 2re p re s e n ta tio n o f w h a t wa s p o ste d o n th o se p a g e s, a n d th e o ffic e r te stifie d

o u tsid e th e p re se nc e of th e ju ry th a t th e p h o t o g ra p hs po ste d o n th e p a ge s

d e p ic te d Ha y e s, F ra n c e s, a n d Nwa k a n m a , a m o n g o th e rs. 9 Th is te stim o n y w a s

su ffic ie n t to a

u th e n tic a te th e p h o to g ra

p h s a n d c a

p tio n s, a n d th e tria l c o u rt d id

n o t a b u se its d isc re tio n wh e n it a d m itte d th a t e v id e n c e

. S e e Co tto n v. S ta te

, 2 9 7

Ga

. 2 5 7, 2 6 0 (3 ) (7 73 S E2 d 2 4 2 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (n e w Ev id e n c e C o de c a se , b u t n o tin g

th a t ru le s fo r a

uth e n tic a tio n o f so c ia l me d i a p o stin g s a re u n c h a n g e d fro m o ld

Ev id e nc e Co d e ).

5

. Bla ck l e d g e a lso c la im s th a t th e tria l c ou rt e rre d wh e n it a dm itte d c e ll

p h o ne re c o rd s th a t pla c e d h im

, Ha y e s, a n d A b d u s-S a la a m a t t h e c rim e sc e n e

n e a r th e tim e of th e mu r d e r

. T h e tria l c o u rt a d m itte d th e re c ord s u n d e r th e

b u sin e ss re c o rd s e x c e p tio n to th e h e a rsa y ru le

, se e fo rm e r OCGA § 2 4 -3 -1 4

, 1 0

a n d we will n o t re ve rse th e a d m issio n o f su c h e v id e n c e a bse nt a n a b u se o f

d i s c r e t i o n

. S e e Hu rst v

. S ta te

, 2 8 5 Ga

. 2 9 4

, 2 97 (3 ) (6 7 6 S E2 d 1 6 5 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

9 In addition, the State presented t he testim ony of a l ega l c o m pliance of

f icer f or My S pace, a lt h o u g h we previously have held that such testim ony is not necessary to authenticate printouts f

rom a social networking site. See Burgess, 292 Ga. at 823 (4).

1 0 The business records exception was carried f orward, with som e changes, into the

new Evidence Code and now can be f ound at OCGA § 24-8-803 (6).

1 3He re , a s to e a c h se t o f p h o n e re c ord s, a re c o rd s c u s t o d ia n fo r th e c e ll p h o n e

c o m p a ny g a v e te stim o ny to sh o w th a t th e re c o rd s we re c re a te d in th e re g u la r

c o u rse o f b u sin e ss a t o r n e a r th e tim e th a t th e p h o n e c a lls we re m a d e a n d th e c e ll

to we rs d e te c te d th e pre se n c e o f th e p h o n e s. Th is te stim o ny p ro v id e d a su ffic ie n t

b a sis fo r th e tria l c o u rt to d e te rm in e th a t th e re c o rd s we re a d m issib l e u n d e r

fo rm e r OCGA § 2 4-3 -1 4

. S e e Kilg o re v

. S ta te

, 2 9 5 Ga

. 7 29

, 7 3 2 (2 ) (7 6 3 S E2 d

6 8 5 ) (2 01 4 ). 1 1

6

. F in a lly

, Bla c k le d g e a rg ue s th a t h is c on stitu tio n a l rig h t to c on fro n ta tio n

wa s v io la te d wh e n th e tria l c o u rt a llo we d te s t im o n y a b o u t a p re tria l sta te m e n t

m a d e b y F ra n c is (wh o d id n o t te stify ), wh ic h im plic a te d B l a c k le d g e a s th e

sh o o te r. Bu t th e Co n fro n ta tio n Cla u se a ffo rd s a rig h t to c on fro n t a c o -d e fe n d a n t

a b o u t a p re tria l sta te m e n t o n ly wh e n th e sta te m e n t wa s “ te stim on ia l,” m e a n in g

t h a t a p rim a ry p u rp o se fo r wh ic h th e sta te m e n t wa s g iv e n “ w a s to e sta b li s h

e v id e n c e th a t c ou ld b e u se d in a f u t u re p ro se c u tio n.” F a v o rs v

. S ta te

, 2 9 6 Ga

.

8 4 2

, 8 4 5 (2 ) (7 70 S E2 d 8 55 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (c ita tio n a n d pu n c tu a tio n o m itte d ). He re ,

F ra n c is m a d e th e sta te m e n t to a ja ilh o use in fo rm an t d u rin g th e c o n c e a l me n t

1 1 Even if it were otherwise, Blackledge was not harm ed by the introduction of the cell phone records, g iven th a t h e adm itted that h e and his co-def endants were present at the
apartm ent com

plex around the tim e that Brown was killed.

1 4p h a se o f th e c o n sp ira c y , a n d it is c le a r th a t th e sta te m e n t wa s n o t te stim o n ia l in

n a tu re . As a

re su lt, th is e nu m e ra tio n o f e rro r h a s n o m e rit.

Ju d g m e n t a ffirm e d . All th e Ju stic e s c o n c u r.

1 5