Collier v. State

A Fulton County jury convicted Justin Collier of felony murder in the shooting death of Joshua Torrance, who ran off during a phone sale and was shot in the back while fleeing. Collier testified he fired in self-defense after Torrance shot at him. On appeal to the Supreme Court of Georgia, Collier argued the trial judge should have declared a mistrial after a prosecutor mentioned a state criminal-records database in opening statements, and again after a closing argument remark about being shot at. He also challenged the playing of two jail calls in which he denied shooting anyone. The court rejected all three claims. It found the remarks did not deny him a fair trial, and the calls were properly used to challenge his testimony.

A trial judge does not abuse his discretion by denying a mistrial over a passing reference to a criminal-records database when other evidence is substantial, or over closing argument that draws reasonable inferences from the evidence. Jail calls contradicting a defendant's self-defense testimony are highly probative and not unfairly prejudicial.

The ruling shows how Georgia courts weigh brief prosecutor comments against the full trial record, and that a defendant's jail-call statements contradicting his courtroom testimony can be used to impeach him. Defendants and prosecutors can expect mistrial requests over passing remarks to face a high bar.

Affirmed

1. The court reviews a denial of a mistrial for abuse of discretion, meaning the trial judge's decision stands unless a mistrial was essential to a fair trial. It looks at the remark, the other evidence, and how the judge and lawyers handled it.
2. On the opening statement, the prosecutor made clear the database information came from Collier's driver's license application, not a criminal history. Any inference of a record matched other evidence, and the evidence of guilt was substantial, so the remark did not deny a fair trial.
3. For the jail calls, the court applied Rule 403 (O.C.G.A. § 24-4-403), which lets a judge exclude evidence only if its value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. Exclusion is an extraordinary remedy, and the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to admission.
4. The first call, where Collier said he did not shoot anyone, was highly probative because it contradicted his self-defense testimony. Evidence is not unfairly prejudicial merely because it hurts the defendant.
5. Collier argued only the first call in his brief. Even so, the second call, which hinted at a false alibi, added only minimal prejudice because the first call had already impeached him.
6. On closing argument, prosecutors may argue reasonable inferences from the evidence. Questioning Collier's claim that he was unused to gunfire, based on his testimony and the video of him walking calmly away, was not a reference to facts outside the evidence, so no curative instruction or mistrial was required.

• felony murder conviction
• mistrial motion
• jail phone calls
• prosecutor closing argument
• Fulton County