All States › Evidence
Neutral Court Opinion Apr 27, 2026

Larkins v. State

── Larkins v. State ── Court: Supreme Court of Georgia Date: April 21, 2026 Category: General 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: April 21, 2026 S26A0306. LARKINS v. THE STATE. LAGRUA, Justice. Appellant Matthew Larkins appeals his convictions for malice murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of Shanna Smith. 1 On appeal, Larkins argues that his convictions should be ————————————————————— 1 Smith was shot and killed on August 4, 2016. On December 28, 2018, a Fulton County grand jury indicted Larkins, Dejon Fuller, Richard Ash, Travon Mack, and Darien Sherry for the following counts: participation in criminal street gang activity (Count 1); malice murder (Count 2); felony murder predicated on aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (Count 3); felony murder predicated on criminal damage to property (Count 4); felony murder predicated on participation in criminal street gang activity (Count 5); felony murder predicated on possession of a firearm by a convicted felon—as to Ash (Count 6); felony murder predicated on possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer—as to Fuller (Count 7); felony murder predicated on possession of a firearm by a convicted felon—as to Larkins (Count 8); felony murder predicated on possession of a firearm by a convicted felon—as to Mack (Count 9); aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (Count 10); criminal damage to property (Count 11); two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (Counts 12 and 13); possession of a firearm by a convicted felon—as to Ash (Count 14); possession of a firearm by a first offender probationer—as to Fuller (Count 15); possession of a firearm by a convicted felon—as to Larkins (Count 16); and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon—as to Mack (Count 17). Fuller pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of voluntary manslaughter and reversed based on the following contentions: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions in this case because the State failed to adequately corroborate the testimony of accomplice Dejon Fuller; (2) the trial court committed plain error when it gave a misleading jury instruction on the use of a testifying co-defendant’s out-of-court statements and trial testimony; (3) Larkins’s trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to object when the trial court improperly commented on the evidence presented at trial; (4) the trial court erred when it admitted hearsay statements under ————————————————————— testified for the State at trial. Before trial, Sherry’s case was severed, and Count 1 (participation in criminal street gang activity) and Count 5 (felony murder predicated on participation in criminal street gang activity) were bifurcated. Larkins, Ash, and Mack were then jointly tried on the remaining counts from October 15 to October 23, 2019. Larkins was found guilty on all counts against him that were not bifurcated for trial (i.e., Counts 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 16). The jury also found Mack guilty on all such counts, but his case is not part of this appeal. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the charges against Ash. The State moved to nolle pross Counts 1 and 5 against Larkins and Mack, and the trial court granted the request without objection. The trial court sentenced Larkins to life in prison on the malice murder count (Count 2), plus a total of 25 consecutive years to serve on Counts 11, 1
CourtListener · Apr 21, 2026
Original link
Share on X Share on Facebook
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own address as its source and its own type. #}