FI FTH DI VI SI ON

M CFA DDEN, P. J.

, GOBEI L and PI NSON, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

A pr i l 14, 2022



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 2 A0 34 9 . DRAKE v

. THE STATE.

P I N S O N

, J u d g e.

Di jo u n W i l l D r a k e w as co n v i ct ed o f arm ed ro b b ery an d o t h er cri m es fo r

ro b b in g a c o n v en i en ce s t o re w i t h a co -d efen d an t

, Jo n at han Geo rg e W i l s o n

. On

ap p eal

, Drak e (1 ) ch al l en g es t h e s u ffi ci en cy o f t he ev i d e n c e

, c l ai m i n g t h at t h e

ci rcu m s t an t i al ev id en ce ag ai n s t h i m di d no t el i m i n at e e v ery reas o n ab l e h y p o t h es i s

o t h er t h an h i s g u i l t ; an d (2 ) cl ai m s t hat t h e t ri al co u rt g av e co n fu s i ng j u ry i n s t ru ct i on s

ab o ut m ere p res en ce an d m ere as s o ci at i o n

. W e reject each co nt en t i o n

. We f i r s t

co n cl u d e t h at t h e ev i d en ce au t h o ri zed t h e ju ry t o f i n d t h at t h e o n l y reas o n ab l e

h y p o t h es i s was t h at o f Drak e’ s g u i l t

. Th e ev id en ce s ho wed t h at t h e t w o ro b b ers u s ed

a car b el o n g i n g t o Drak e’ s g i rl fri en d

, w h i ch t h ey cras h ed s oo n aft er t h e ro b b ery

, an d

t h at aro u n d t h e s am e t i m e, Drak e’ s co -d efen d an t W i l s on (wh o se b l o o d was i d en t i fi edi n th e cras h ed car) ex ch an ged a n u m b er o f ph o n e cal l s an d t ex t m es s ag es wi t h p eo p l e

co n nect ed t o Drak e. A rat i o n al ju ro r co u ld h av e fo u nd th at t h e o n l y reas o n ab l e

ex p lan at i o n fo r t h i s ev i d en ce was t h at Drak e co m m i t ted t h e cri m es al o n gs i d e W i l s o n,

an d s o Drak e’ s s u ffi ci en c y c l a i m fai l s

. A s fo r t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ju ry i n s t ru ct i o n s

, we

h av e al read y h el d t h at Geo rg i a’ s p at t ern i n s t ru ct i on s o n m ere pres en ce an d m ere

as s o ci at io n co rrect l y s t at e t h e l aw, an d t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s i n s t ru ct i o ns on t h o se i s s u es

t rack ed t h e p at t ern i n s t ru ct i o n s al m o s t ex act l y

.

Back gro u n d

J u s t aft er m i d n i gh t o n M a r c h 5

, 2 0 1 5

, Mo ham m ad N azi r, t h e m an ag er o f a

Co rn er M art Ch ev ro n

, an d t wo o t h er em p l o y ees were cl o s i n g u p fo r t h e ev en i n g wh en

t h ey were ro b b ed b y t wo m en

. Nazi r’ s t es t i m o n y an d s u rv ei l l a n c e fo o t ag e s h o wed

t h at t h e t wo m en fo rced t hei r way i n t o th e Co rn er Mart an d t o o k m o n ey

, scrat ch -o ff

l o t t ery t i ck et s

, an d co nd o m s fro m t h e s t o re, as wel l as Nazi r’ s cel l p h o n e, an d t h e

wal l et o f o ne of t h e co wo rk ers

, J an i Im ran

. Bo t h m en wo re b l ack g l o v es an d h ad t h ei r

faces co v ered

. O n e m an w as carry i n g a si l v er han d g u n, an d t he o t h er carri ed a p u m p

s h o t g u n

. Th e p erp et rat o rs t hen d ro v e off i n a wh i t e Lex u s

. Aft er t h e p erp et rat o rs fl ed

,

Nazi r cal l ed 9 1 1

.

2Ten m i n u t es lat er, p o l i ce recei v ed a cal l ab o ut a s i n g l e-v eh i cl e acci d en t ab o ut

2 .5 m il es fro m t h e Co rn er M art

. Res p o n d i n g to t h e s cen e, p o l i ce fo u n d a Lex u s t h at

h ad g on e o ff t he ro ad way

. Th e Lex us w a s reg i s t ered t o a wo m an n am ed Sh areck a

Cal h ou n

, wh o w as Drak e’ s g i rl fri en d

. Po l ice co n t act ed Cal h o un an d l earn ed t h at s h e

was n ot i n p os ses s i o n o f h er car at t h e t i m e o f t h e cri m e.

Po l i ce o b t ai n ed a warran t an d s earch ed t he L ex u s

. In an d aro un d t h e car, t h ey

fo u n d i t em s t hat h ad b een s t o l en fro m t h e Co rn er M art

— cas h

, l ot t ery t i c k et s

,

co n do m s , Im

ran ’ s wal l et

— as wel l as cl o th g l o ves , a k n i t cap , a wh i t e wri s t wat ch

, a

t o y p u m p -act i o n sh o t g un t h at l o o k ed real , a s i l ver h an d g u n , an d a cel l p h o n e. Th ey

al s o fo u n d Drak e’ s w al l et

, s oci al s ecu ri t y card

, an d ex p i red d ri v er’ s l i cen s e. Bo th

ai rb ag s h ad dep l o y ed in t h e cras h

, an d b o t h had b l o o d o n t h em

. Bl o o d fro m b o t h

ai rb ag s

, as w el l a s s wab b i n g s fro m el s ewh ere i n t h e Lex u s, were l at er m at ch ed

t h ro u g h DNA an al y s i s to Drak e’ s co -d efen d an t

, W i l s o n

. No si m il ar m at ch es were

m ad e t o Drak e o r t o an y o t h er p ers o n

.

Th e p o l ice i nv es t ig at i o n al s o rel i ed on cel l p ho n e reco rd s

. Th e i n v e s t i g a t i o n

rev eal ed t h at o n t h e n i g h t o f t h e cri m e

, S h areck a Cal h ou n was wi t h h er fri en d,

Dan iel l e J o h n s o n

, an d h ad acces s t o J o h n so n ’ s cel l ph o ne. Po l i ce o b t ai n ed a s earch

warran t fo r J o h n s o n ’ s p h o n e, an d t h ey al s o ob t ai n ed a warran t fo r t h e p h o n e o f

3Drak e’ s co -d efen d an t

, W i ls o n. An ex am i n at i on of J o h n s o n ’ s an d W i l s o n’ s cel l p h o n e

reco rd s rev eal ed a “ s ig ni fi can t i n creas e i n in co m i n g an d o u t g o i n g cal l s ” i m m ed i at el y

aft er t h e t i m e o f t he cri m e, i ncl u d i n g o n e cal l fro m J o h n s o n ’s p h o n e t o Cal h o u n ’ s

p h o n e an d nu m ero u s cal l s an d t ex t m es sag es b et ween th e p h o n e o f Sh areck a’ s s i s t er,

Sh av an a Cal h o u n

, an d t h o s e o f W i l s o n an d J o h n s o n

.

Drak e an d W i l s on b o th res t ed wi t h o u t p res en ti n g an y ev i den ce. In cl o s i n g,

Drak e’ s co u n s el arg u ed t h at t h e St at e p o ss es s ed n o d i rect ev id en ce ag ai n s t Drak e an d

h ad b ro u gh t t h e cas e ag ai ns t h i m s i m p ly b ecau s e h e w as “ cl os e t o t h e p eo p l e wh o

were i n v o l v ed .” As t o th e ci rcu m s t an t i al ev id en ce, co u n s el u rg ed th e j u ry t o co n s i d er

“ reas o nab l e, al t ern at iv e” ex p l an at i o n s

.

Th e t ri al co u rt ’ s ch arg e t o t h e ju ry i ncl u d ed t wo i n s t ru ct i o n s t h at are at i s s u e

i n t hi s ap p eal . Th e fi rs t was t h e co u rt ’ s i n s tru ct i on o n m ere p res en ce:

A ju ry i s n o t au t h o ri zed t o fi n d a p ers o n w h o i s m erel y p res en t at t h e

s cen e o f t h e co m

m i s s i o n o f a cri m e at t h e t i m e o f i t s p erp et rat i o n g u i l t y

o f co n s en t i n an d co n cu rren ce i n t h e co m m i s s i o n o f t h e cri m e, u n l es s

,

t h e ev i d en ce s ho ws b ey o n d a reas o nab l e d o ub t t h at su ch p ers o n

co m m i t t ed t h e al l eg ed cri m e, h el p ed i n t h e ac t u al p erp et rat i o n o f th e

cri m e o r p art i ci p at ed i n t h e cri m i n al en deav o r.

Th e s eco nd i n st ru ct i o n co n cern ed m ere as s o ci at i on :

4A ju ry i s n ot au t h o ri zed t o fi n d a pers o n wh o i s m erel y as so ci at ed w i t h

o t h er p ers o n s in vo l v ed in t h e co m m is s i o n o f a cri m e, g u i l t y o f, co n s en t

i n o r co n cu rren ce i n t h e co m m i s s i o n o f th e cri m e, u nl es s t h e ev i d en ce

s h o ws b ey on d a reas o n ab l e d o u b t t h at s u ch p ers on h el p ed i n t he act ual

p erp et rat i on o f t he cri m e o r p art ici p at ed i n t h e cri m i n al en d eav o r.

Nei t h er d efen d an t o b

ject ed t o ei t h er i n s t ru ct i on

.

Drak e was co n vi ct ed o f m u l t i p l e co u n t s o f arm ed ro b b ery

, ag g rav at ed as s au l t

,

an d po s s es s i o n o f a fi rearm d u ri n g t h e co m m i ss i o n o f a cri m e. 1 Th e tri al co u rt g ran t ed

Drak e’ s m ot i o n fo r n ew t ri al as t o t h e co n vi ct io n fo r p os s es si n g a fi rearm d u ri n g t h e

co m m i s s io n o f a cri m e, an d t h at co n v i ct i o n was l at er n ol l e p ro s s ed

. Th e co u rt d en i ed

t h e m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al as t o t h e o t h er co n v ict i o n s , an d t h i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

Di s cu ss i o n

1

. Drak e cl ai m s th at t he ci rcu m s t an t i al ev i d en ce ag ai n st h i m was n ot su ffi ci en t

t o s u p p o rt h i s c o n v i ct i on s. To rev i ew t h e s uffi ci en cy o f th e ev i d en ce, we n ei t h er

wei g h ev i d en ce n o r ju dg e t h e cred i b i l it y o f w i t n es ses

. In s t ead

, we det erm i n e o n l y

“ wh et h er, aft er v i ewi n g t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e l i g ht m o s t fav o rab le t o t h e p ro s ecu t i o n,

a n y rat i o n al t ri er o f fact co u l d h av e fo u n d t h e es s en t i al el em en t s o f t h e cri m e b ey o n d

1 W i l s o n w as co nv i ct ed of al l t h e s am e co u n t s

. Hi s co n v ict i o n s were affi rm ed

o n ap p eal

. See W

i ls o n v. St at e

,

_

_ _ Ga. Ap p

.

_

_ _ (Cas e No

. A2 2A0 34 8

, d eci d ed o n

_ _ _ _ ).

5a reas o n ab l e d o ub t .” Ja cks o n v. Vi r g i n i a

, 4 4 3 U. S. 3 0 7

, 31 9 (III) (B) (9 9 SCt 2 7 8 1,

6 1 LE2 d 5 6 0 ) (1 9 7 9 ).

A co n v ict i o n can res t o n ci r c u m s t an ti al ev i den ce al o ne i f t h at ev i d en ce

“ ex cl u d e[s ] ev ery o t h er reas o n ab l e h y p o th es i s s av e t h at o f t h e g u i l t o f t h e accu s ed .”

OCGA § 2 4 -1 4 -6 ; s ee Gr a h a m v. St a t e

, 3 2 0 Ga. A p p

. 7 1 4 , 7 2 0 (2 ) (7 40 SE2 d 6 4 9 )

(2 0 1 3). Th e k ey wo rd i s “ reas o n ab le.” Th e ev i d en ce “ n eed n o t ex cl u d e ev ery

co n cei va b l e i n feren ce o r h y po t h es i s .” Gr a ves v. S ta te

, 3 0 6 Ga. 4 8 5

, 4 87 (1 ) (8 3 1

SE2 d 7 4 7 ) (2 0 1 9 ) (cl ean ed u p ). An d b o th t he qu es t i o n wh et h er an al t ern at i v e

h y p o t h es i s i s “ reas o n ab l e” an d t h e u l t i m at e q u es ti o n wh et h er t he ci rcu m s t an t i al

ev i d en ce ex cl u d es s u ch hy p o th es es are fo r t h e ju ry t o an s wer. Id .; s ee al s o Mer r i t t v.

S t a t e

, 2 8 5 G a

. 7 7 8

, 7 7 9 (1 ) (6 8 3 SE2 d 8 5 5 ) (2 0 0 9 ). W e wi l l n o t d is t u rb a ju ry ’ s

fi nd i ng o n t h o s e q u es t i o ns u n les s i t i s “ i n s up p o rt ab l e as a m at t er o f l aw.” Gr a ves

, 3 0 6

Ga. at 4 87 (1 ).

Here, Drak e co n t en d s t h at t h e ci rcu m s t an t i al ev i d en ce d o es n o t ex c l u d e t h e

“ reas o nab l e h y

p o t h es i s ” t h at h e “ was n o t o ne o f t h e p erp et rat ors o f th e arm ed ro b b ery

an d was i n fact el sewh ere w h en i t t o o k p l ace.” W e d i s ag ree. Gi v en t h e ev i d en ce

i n t ro du ced at t ri al

, a rat i o n al ju ro r co u ld h av e reject ed Drak e’ s al t ern at i v e h y p o t h es i s

as u nreas o nab l e. Un d er t h at hy p o th es i s

, Drak e left h i s d r i v e r ’ s l i cen s e, wal l et

, an d

6s o ci al s ecu ri t y card i n h i s g irl f ri en d’ s Lex u s n o t i n hi s ru s h t o g et away fro m t h e

acci den t scen e aft er h e an d W i l s o n cras h ed th e car, b u t at s o m e u n kn o wn t im e b efo re

t h e ro b b ery t o o k p l ace. Th i s m ig h t b e p l au s i b l e en o u g h i n i s ol at i o n : m an y o f u s h av e

l eft pers o n al i t em s i n s o m e o n e el s e’ s car befo re. Bu t t h e res t of t h e st o ry i s h ard to

fi gu re. If D r a k e w e r e o u t of t h e p i ct u re, t h en t wo s tran g ers wi t h n o ap p aren t

rel at i o n s h i p t o Drak e’ s gi rl fri en d s o m eh o w g ai n ed acces s t o her car t h e n ig h t o f t h e

ro b b ery

. A n d t h en

, ri g h t aft er ro b b i n g t h e s t o re, t h os e s am e s t ran gers fo r s o m e reas o n

p l aced a n d r e c e i v ed a fl u rry o f p h o n e cal l s an d t ex t m es s ag es t o an d fro m p eo p l e

cl o s e t o Drak e’ s g i rl fri en d (b o t h h er s is t er an d a fri en d sh e was wi t h at t h e t i m e). Is

t h i s al tern at iv e Drak e-l es s h y p o t h es i s co n cei v ab l e? May b e. Bu t t h e ci rcu m s t an t i al

ev i d e n c e n e e d o n l y ex cl u d e reas o nab l e h y p o th es es t o s u p p o rt a co n v i ct i o n

. An d a

rat i o nal ju ro r co u l d h av e co ncl u d ed t h at t h i s hy po t h es i s

, wh i ch rem ov es t h e o n l y

ap p aren t l i n k b et ween t h e p erp et rat ors an d t h e Lex us an d p os t -cri m e p h o n e

cal l s— i

. e., Drak e— was s i m p l y n o t a reas o n ab l e o n e. S ee, e.g

., G r a ves

, 3 06 Ga. at

4 8 7 (1 ) (ju ry was au t ho ri zed t o reject h y p o t hes i s t h at an u n s een m an wh o h ad s h ared

a t ax i wi t h t h e d efen dan t h ad s h o t t h e d ri ver, wh ere o n l y t h e d efen dan t was s een o n

s u rv ei l l an ce v i d eo ex i t i ng t h e tax i aft er t he cras h ); Gr a h a m

, 3 2 0 G a. Ap p

. at 7 2 0 (2 )

(ju ry was au t h o ri zed to reject hy p o t h es i s t h at th e i n fan t v i ct i m ’ s i n ju ri es were cau s ed

7b y h er fat h er rat h er t h an t h e d efen d an t w h ere, am o n g o th er t hi n g s

, t h e v i ct i m h ad

b een in t h e d efen d an t ’ s care fo r t wo h o u rs b efo re s he d ied an d a m e d i c al ex p ert

t es t i fi ed t h at s h e wo u ld h a v e d i ed “ wi th i n m in u t es o r ho u rs ” aft er s u fferi n g b rai n

i n ju ry ); Cr a wf

o r d v. S t a t e

, 2 9 2 Ga. Ap p

. 4 63

, 4 6 4 -6 5 (1 ) (6 6 4 SE2 d 8 20 ) (2 0 0 8 )

(p res en ce o f d efen d an t ’ s fi n g erp ri n t s in m u l ti p l e l o cat i o n s i n t h e v i ct i m ’ s h o m e an d

car was su ffi ci en t t o co n vi ct h i m o f b u rg lary

, rap e, arm ed ro b b ery

, h i jack i ng a m o t o r

v eh icl e, an d o t h er cri m es

, ev en t h o u g h t h e reco rd s h o wed d efen d an t h ad b een i n s i d e

d efen d an t ’ s h o m e o n an earl i er o ccas i o n). Drak e’ s s u ffi ci en cy cl ai m t h erefo re fai l s

.

2

. In t wo rel at ed cl ai m s o f erro r, D rak e co n t en d s t h at th e t r i a l co urt ’ s

i n s t ru ct i o n s o n m ere p res en ce an d m ere as s o ci at i o n w ere “ fat al l y fl awed .” Becau s e

t ri al co u n s el d i d n o t o b

ject t o t hes e i ns t ru ct i o n s, we rev i ew t h em on l y fo r pl ai n erro r:

an erro r t hat i s ob v i o us an d n ot s u b ject t o reas o n ab l e d is pu t e, an d w h i ch affect ed t h e

o u t co m e o f t h e t ri al . See OCGA § 1 7 -8 -5 8 (b ); W o o d a rd v. S t a t e

, 29 6 Ga. 80 3

, 8 0 6

(2 ) (7 7 1 SE2 d 3 6 2 ) (2 0 1 5 ); Va s q u ez v. S t a t e , 3 06 Ga. 2 1 6 , 2 2 5 (2 ) (8 3 0 SE2 d 1 4 3 )

(2 0 1 9) (ci t at i o n o m it t ed ). An ap p el l at e co u rt h as d i scret i o n to rem ed y p lai n erro r i f

i t “ s eri o u s l y affect s t h e f a i r n e s s

, i n t eg ri t y or p u b l i c rep u t at io n o f ju d i ci al

p ro ceed in g s .” Id

. Acco rd Pu cket t v. Un it ed S t a t es

, 5 5 6 U. S. 1 2 9

, 1 3 5 (II) (1 2 9 SCt

1 4 2 3 , 1 7 3 LE2 d 2 6 6 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

8W e di s cern n o erro r, m u ch l es s p l ai n erro r, i n t he ch al l en ged i n s t ru ct i o n s

. J u ry

ch arg es are g en eral l y co n s i d ered co rrect an d free fro m erro r i f “ t h e ch arg es

, as g i v en

,

were co rrect s tat em en ts o f t h e l aw an d

, as a wh o le, wo u l d no t m i s lead a ju ry o f

o rd i n ary i n t el l i g en ce.” S i ms v. S t a t e

, 2 9 6 G a. A p p

. 4 6 1

, 4 6 4 ( 3 ) ( 6 7 5 SE2 d 2 4 1 )

(2 0 0 9) (ci t at io n an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). Th e co u rt ’ s i ns t ru ct i o ns o n m ere pres en ce

an d m ere as s o ci at io n t rack ed t h e p at t ern ju ry i n s t ru ct i o n s vi rt ual l y wo rd fo r wo rd

. See

Ga. Su g g es t ed Pat t ern Ju ry In s t ru ct i on s - Cri m i n al § § 1

. 4 3

. 3 0 (m ere p res en ce),

1 .4 3.3 1 (m ere as s o ci at io n ). An d we h av e al read y ap p ro v ed th o se p at t ern i n s t ru ct i on s

as co rrect s t at em en ts o f th e l aw. See, e. g

. , Po t ts v. S t a t e

, 3 3 1 Ga. Ap p. 8 5 7

, 8 6 3 -6 6

(1 ) (7 7 1 SE2 d 5 1 0 ) (2 0 1 5 ) (m ere as s o ci at i o n ); Ar n ol d v. S t a t e

, 3 0 5 Ga. Ap p

. 4 5

, 5 4

-

5 5 (7 ) (6 9 9 SE2 d 7 7 ) (2 0 10 ) (m ere p res en ce).

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . McFa d

d en , P. J., a n d

Go b ei l

, J., co n cu r

.

9