Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
POWELL v. The STATE.
Appellant Rickey Powell appeals the judgment of conviction entered against him on a number of crimes committed in connection with the murder of Herta Bailey in Muscogee County.1 On appeal Powell challenges only the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him.
On September 30, 2009, police received a report from Herta Bailey's family that Mrs. Bailey and her car were missing. That same day, suspicious activity was noted on one of the missing woman's credit cards when it was used to pay the outstanding utility and cable bills of appellant. Mrs. Bailey leased a house on Pine Needle Drive in Columbus to appellant and had sent him several notices to vacate the premises. Mrs. Bailey's missing credit card was found in appellant's wallet when appellant was arrested on September 30 for the fraudulent use of the credit card. As police were transporting him to police headquarters following his arrest, appellant directed them to the site of Mrs. Bailey's missing car, and her body was found in the car's trunk. The parties stipulated that the forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy determined the cause of death to be manual strangulation. The victim's head and face were disfigured by muriatic acid having been poured on her.
The victim's handwritten appointment book listed an appointment with appellant on the evening of September 29, and the victim's personal trainer testified the victim told him she had an appointment at her office at 6 p.m. on September 29 with a troublesome tenant who rented a house on Pine Needle Drive. The victim's employer testified he last saw her at their offices at 6 p.m. September 29. A neighbor of appellant on Pine Needle Drive testified that he was familiar with the victim's car and that appellant was driving Mrs. Bailey's car when the witness spoke to him at 8:15 p.m. on September 29.
After reviewing the trial transcript, we conclude the evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of malice murder, felony murder, robbery, theft by taking motor vehicle, financial transaction card theft, multiple counts of financial transaction card fraud, and concealing a death. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). However, the evidence presented was not sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find appellant guilty of aggravated battery. “In order to constitute aggravated battery, the bodily harm to the victim must occur before death.” Hance v. State, 245 Ga. 856(3), 268 S.E.2d 339 (1980). There was no evidence presented at trial from which the jury could conclude that the victim was not dead at the time the muriatic acid was poured on her. Compare Hall v. Terrell, 285 Ga. 448(II)(C), 679 S.E.2d 17 (2009); Miller v. State, 275 Ga. 730(1), 571 S.E.2d 788 (2002). Accordingly, we reverse the conviction for aggravated battery.
The trial court “merged” the malice murder conviction into the felony murder conviction and sentenced appellant to life imprisonment for felony murder. However, “[w]hen a jury returns guilty verdicts on both felony and malice murder charges in connection with the death of one person, it is the felony murder conviction, not the malice murder conviction, that is ‘simply surplusage’ [cits.], and stands vacated by operation of law.” Williams v. State, 270 Ga. 125(4), 508 S.E.2d 415 (1998). As was the case in Williams, appellant has suffered no harm from the trial court's action in vacating the malice murder conviction and retaining the felony murder conviction since the sentence imposed, life imprisonment, is appropriate for both crimes. Id. Compare Lucky v. State, 286 Ga. 478(2), 689 S.E.2d 825 (2010) (where erroneously sentencing the defendant on the felony murder conviction instead of the malice murder conviction made a difference in the over-all sentence due to the revival of the conviction for the predicate felony of the felony murder conviction).
Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.
BENHAM, Justice.
All the Justices concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. S11A1842.
Decided: October 17, 2011
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)