CourtListener 10680528

Full text

320 Ga. 766
FINAL COPY

S25A0056. WILSON v. THE STATE.

PETERSON, Presiding Justice.

Shamar Dequan Wilson appeals his convictions related to the

robbery and death of Rashawn Mays and the attempted armed

robbery of Adrian Bennett.1 On appeal, Wilson argues that the

evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable

doubt as to the count of attempted armed robbery and associated

1 The crimes occurred on January 22, 2020. On April 30, 2021, a Lowndes

County grand jury indicted Wilson, charging him with felony murder (Count
1), armed robbery of Mays (Count 3), attempted armed robbery of Bennett
(Count 5), and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony
(Counts 2, 4, and 6). At a January 2022 trial, the jury found Wilson guilty of
all counts. On March 2, 2022, the trial court sentenced Wilson to life with the
possibility of parole for felony murder (Count 1), a consecutive five-year
sentence for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Count
2), a concurrent ten-year sentence for attempted armed robbery (Count 5), and
a concurrent five-year sentence for possession of a firearm during the
commission of a felony (Count 6). The trial court merged the armed robbery
(Count 3) and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Count
4) counts. On March 8, 2022, Wilson timely filed a motion for a new trial, which
was amended on January 24, 2024. After a hearing, the trial court denied
Wilson’s motion. On June 20, 2024, Wilson timely filed a notice of appeal, and
the case was submitted to this Court’s term beginning in December 2024 for a
decision on the briefs.
count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.2

We disagree and affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence

presented at trial showed the following. On January 22, 2020, Mays

picked up Bennett at a Winn Dixie in Valdosta. After stopping at

another store, Mays and Bennett drove to a house that Mays was

renting from Bennett. When they arrived, Wilson was on the porch,

and Rashaad Johnson, who gave Wilson a ride, was in a truck in

front of the house. Wilson wanted to purchase marijuana from Mays,

2 Wilson asks the Court to reverse all of his convictions on the basis of

insufficient evidence. But he makes specific arguments only as to attempted
armed robbery (Count 5) and the associated count of possession of a firearm
during the commission of a felony (Count 6). As a result, we address only
whether the evidence was sufficient to support Wilson’s convictions on Counts
5 and 6. See Supreme Court Rule 22; Davenport v. State, 309 Ga. 385, 391-399
(4) (846 SE2d 83) (2020) (holding that this Court no longer routinely reviews
the sufficiency of the evidence sua sponte in non-death penalty cases).
Although we do not address whether the evidence was sufficient to
support Wilson’s felony murder conviction, we “retain jurisdiction because the
appeal arises from a case ‘in which a sentence of death was imposed or could
be imposed’ under Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (8).” Henderson v. State,
303 Ga. 241, 244 (1) (811 SE2d 388) (2018) (citation and punctuation omitted);
see Garcia-Jarquin v. State, 314 Ga. 555, 555 n.1 (878 SE2d 200) (2022)
(exercising jurisdiction where the defendant was convicted of malice murder
and aggravated assault but argued on appeal only that the evidence was
insufficient to support his aggravated assault charge). But see id. at 557
(Bethel, J., concurring) (criticizing as incorrect our precedent on jurisdiction
and encouraging reconsideration).
2
but did not have enough money. After unsuccessfully attempting to

convince Mays to sell him marijuana at a reduced price, Wilson left

with Johnson. Wilson and Johnson left in search of an ATM and then

returned to Mays’s home. Johnson stayed in the truck while Wilson

got out and continued his discussion with Mays.

At trial, Bennett testified that even though Wilson still did not

have enough money to purchase the quantity of marijuana he

wanted, Wilson and Mays eventually came to an agreement. Mays

and Bennett then went inside the house and closed the door. After

Mays finished weighing and packaging the marijuana, Wilson came

into the house and shot Mays in the head. Wilson then pointed the

gun at Bennett, who got on the ground. Wilson asked him “where’s

the money[,]” and Bennett replied that he did not know. Bennett

looked up at Wilson and began pulling out his wallet and phone to

throw on the ground. In response, Wilson said “no”; Bennett testified

that Wilson’s response was “[a]lmost like he didn’t want [Bennett]

to see him.” Wilson then grabbed the money and marijuana from a

table in the room and ran out the door. After Wilson left, Bennett

3
called 911 from his phone.

Wilson contends that the evidence was insufficient as a matter

of constitutional due process to support his convictions for the

attempted armed robbery of Bennett (Count 5) and the associated

count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony

(Count 6). Specifically, Wilson argues the State failed to prove that

he unlawfully attempted to take property from Bennett because

Wilson responded “no” when Bennett offered his wallet and Wilson

took property belonging to Mays only. Wilson further argues that

because the State failed to prove that he committed attempted

armed robbery, the evidence is also insufficient to support his

conviction for possession of a firearm during the commission of the

attempted armed robbery.

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence as a matter of

constitutional due process, we view the evidence in the light most

favorable to the verdict and inquire whether a rational trier of fact

could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (99 SCt 2781, 61 LE2d

4
560) (1979). “Under this review, we must put aside any questions

about conflicting evidence, the credibility of witnesses, or the weight

of the evidence, leaving the resolution of such things to the

discretion of the trier of fact.” Mims v. State, 304 Ga. 851, 853 (1) (a)

(823 SE2d 325) (2019) (citation and punctuation omitted). To convict

Wilson of attempted armed robbery, the State was required to prove

that Wilson unlawfully attempted to take property belonging to

Bennett by use of an offensive weapon. See OCGA §§ 16-4-1; 16-8-

41 (a). Criminal attempt means “with intent to commit a specific

crime, [Wilson] perform[ed] any act which constitute[d] a

substantial step toward the commission of that crime.” OCGA § 16-

4-1.

Here, Bennett testified that Wilson pointed a gun at him, and

he got on the ground. Wilson then asked Bennett where “the money”

was. A reasonable jury could have concluded that Wilson’s demand

for money was not merely a demand for Mays’s money. In fact,

Bennett understood Wilson’s question as a demand for his money

and began to take out his wallet and phone. Wilson argues that his

5
statement of “no” in response to Bennett taking out his wallet

showed that he had no intent to take Bennett’s property; but a

reasonable jury could infer that Wilson did not take Bennett’s wallet

and phone because he did not want Bennett to look at him. Thus,

there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that

Wilson attempted to take property belonging to Bennett, and we

affirm Wilson’s conviction under Count 5. See Walker v. State, 294

Ga. 752, 752-753 (1) (755 SE2d 790) (2014) (identifying sufficient

evidence to support convictions for both armed robbery and felony

murder predicated on an attempted armed robbery conviction,

where the defendant made a general demand for money, took money

from one victim, and fatally shot second victim who said he did not

have any money).

Because the evidence was sufficient to support Wilson’s

attempted armed robbery conviction, and Bennett testified Wilson

possessed a firearm during the attempted armed robbery, there was

also sufficient evidence to support Count 6.

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.

6
Decided January 28, 2025.

Murder. Lowndes Superior Court. Before Judge Cowart.

Andrew V. Thomas II, for appellant.

Bradfield M. Shealy, District Attorney, Michelle T. Harrison,

Assistant District Attorney; Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General,

Beth A. Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Clint C. Malcolm, Meghan

H. Hill, Senior Assistant Attorneys General, Nicholas D. Nunn,

Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to modification resulting from motions for reconsideration under Supreme Court
Rule 27, the Court’s reconsideration, and editorial revisions by the Reporter of Decisions. The version of the
opinion published in the Advance Sheets for the Georgia Reports, designated as the “Final Copy,” will replace any
prior version on the Court’s website and docket. A bound volume of the Georgia Reports will contain the final and
official text of the opinion.

In the Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided: January 28, 2025

S25A0056. WILSON v. THE STATE.

PETERSON, Presiding Justice.

Shamar Dequan Wilson appeals his convictions related to the

robbery and death of Rashawn Mays and the attempted armed

robbery of Adrian Bennett.1 On appeal, Wilson argues that the

evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable

1 The crimes occurred on January 22, 2020. On April 30, 2021, a Lowndes

County grand jury indicted Wilson, charging him with felony murder (Count
1), armed robbery of Mays (Count 3), attempted armed robbery of Bennett
(Count 5), and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony
(Counts 2, 4, and 6). At a January 2022 trial, the jury found Wilson guilty of
all counts. On March 2, 2022, the trial court sentenced Wilson to life with the
possibility of parole for felony murder (Count 1), a consecutive 5-year sentence
for possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Count 2), a
concurrent 10-year sentence for attempted armed robbery (Count 5), and a
concurrent 5-year sentence for possession of a firearm during the commission
of a felony (Count 6). The trial court merged the armed robbery (Count 3) and
possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Count 4) counts. On
March 8, 2022, Wilson timely filed a motion for a new trial, which was amended
on January 24, 2024. After a hearing, the trial court denied Wilson’s motion.
On June 20, 2024, Wilson timely filed a notice of appeal, and the case was
submitted to this Court’s term beginning in December 2024 for a decision on
the briefs.
doubt as to the count of attempted armed robbery and associated

count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.2

We disagree and affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence

presented at trial showed the following. On January 22, 2020, Mays

picked up Bennett at a Winn Dixie in Valdosta. After stopping at

another store, Mays and Bennett drove to a house that Mays was

renting from Bennett. When they arrived, Wilson was on the porch,

and Rashaad Johnson, who gave Wilson a ride, was in a truck in

2 Wilson asks the Court to reverse all of his convictions on the basis of

insufficient evidence. But he makes specific arguments only as to attempted
armed robbery (Count 5) and the associated count of possession of a firearm
during the commission of a felony (Count 6). As a result, we address only
whether the evidence was sufficient to support Wilson’s convictions on Counts
5 and 6. See Supreme Court Rule 22; Davenport v. State, 309 Ga. 385, 391-399
(4) (846 SE2d 83) (2020) (holding that this Court no longer routinely reviews
the sufficiency of the evidence sua sponte in non-death penalty cases).
Although we do not address whether the evidence was sufficient to
support Wilson’s felony murder conviction, we “retain jurisdiction because the
appeal arises from a case ‘in which a sentence of death was imposed or could
be imposed’ under Ga. Const. Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (8).” Henderson v. State,
303 Ga. 241, 244 (1) (811 SE2d 388) (2018) (citation and punctuation omitted);
see Garcia-Jarquin v. State, 314 Ga. 555, 555 n.1 (878 SE2d 200) (2022)
(exercising jurisdiction where the defendant was convicted of malice murder
and aggravated assault but argued on appeal only that the evidence was
insufficient to support his aggravated assault charge). But see id. at 557
(Bethel, J., concurring) (criticizing as incorrect our precedent on jurisdiction
and encouraging reconsideration).
2
front of the house. Wilson wanted to purchase marijuana from Mays,

but did not have enough money. After unsuccessfully attempting to