Barber v. State

Rashad Barber was convicted by a Fulton County jury of murdering Darius Bottoms during a gang-related shooting in June 2014, along with other crimes. A key witness against him, Kareasha Washington, was herself involved in the events and considered a possible accomplice. Georgia law says an accomplice's testimony alone cannot support a conviction; there must be other evidence connecting the defendant to the crime. Barber argued on appeal that no other real evidence tied him to the shooting, that the trial judge should have stepped aside due to bias, and that the judge wrongly resentenced him later on two counts. The Supreme Court of Georgia found that surveillance video, a witness's description of the shooter, cell phone records, and a social media photo all supported Washington's account. It also found Barber never properly raised the judge bias issue, and that the resentencing corrected sentences that were void under the law.

The court held that Washington's testimony, even if she was an accomplice, was sufficiently corroborated by independent evidence including pawn shop video, a witness's description of the shooter, cell phone records, and a social media photo, so the evidence supported Barber's murder conviction under Georgia's accomplice-corroboration rule.

The ruling reinforces that Georgia juries can rely on circumstantial evidence like video, cell phone records, and social media posts to back up an accomplice's testimony. It also confirms that judges can fix illegal sentences even years later, affecting how courts handle sentencing errors statewide.

Affirmed

1. Georgia law (OCGA § 24-14-8) requires that when the only witness against a defendant is an accomplice, there must be some additional corroborating evidence connecting the defendant to the crime, though only slight corroboration is needed.
2. The court found that even assuming Washington was an accomplice, other evidence not from her testimony, including pawn shop surveillance video, a neighbor's description of the shooter's clothing and appearance, cell phone records showing communication among the group, and a social media photo of Barber holding a gun matching the murder weapon type, corroborated her account.
3. Because Barber did not challenge the jury instructions on corroboration, the only issue was whether a properly instructed jury could have found the corroboration sufficient, and the court concluded it could.
4. On the recusal claim, the court found Barber never filed a proper motion to recuse the trial judge under the court's procedural rule (Uniform Superior Court Rule 25.1), so this claim was not preserved for appellate review.
5. On resentencing, the court explained that a sentence is void if it imposes punishment the law does not allow, and because the original sentencing order failed to impose required sentences on two counts (gang activity and firearm possession), the trial court was authorized, and even required, to correct those void sentences later.
6. The court rejected Barber's argument that the State's earlier mistaken statement about merger prevented correction of the sentence, holding that an illegal sentence cannot be validated through waiver or invited error.

• murder conviction
• gang violence
• accomplice testimony
• judicial recusal
• void sentence