The Georgia Supreme Court issued an opinion Tuesday in *Franklin v. State*, reviewing Marco Franklin's challenge to his felony murder conviction based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The case stems from the December 3, 2018 shooting death of Jamarco Royal in DeKalb County.
Franklin was convicted of felony murder and related crimes following a retrial in September 2022. The case initially went to trial in March 2022 but ended in a mistrial, requiring prosecutors to retry Franklin later that year.
The DeKalb County grand jury returned an indictment on March 5, 2019, charging both Franklin and co-defendant Cortez Nabors with multiple felonies. Franklin faced six counts: malice murder, two counts of felony murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.
During the September 2022 retrial, the jury found Franklin guilty on all charges except malice murder. The trial court sentenced Franklin to life in prison with the possibility of parole for the felony murder conviction and imposed a consecutive five-year term for the firearm possession charge. The court merged the armed robbery and aggravated assault counts with the felony murder count for sentencing purposes.
Under Georgia law, one of the felony murder counts was vacated by operation of law, as established in *Noel v. State* (2015). This procedural requirement prevents multiple felony murder convictions based on the same underlying death.
Franklin filed a motion for new trial on September 19, 2022, immediately following his conviction. He later amended the motion through new counsel on May 14, 2024, and again on September 19, adding claims that his trial counsel was ineffective.
The central issue on appeal involves Franklin's argument that his trial counsel failed to provide adequate representation. Specifically, Franklin claims his attorney was ineffective for failing to move to suppress evidence that was allegedly obtained through a warrantless search. This type of claim requires defendants to demonstrate both that their counsel's performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced their defense.
Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are governed by the standard established in *Strickland v. Washington*, which requires defendants to show that their attorney's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that there is a reasonable probability the result would have been different with competent counsel.
The case highlights ongoing challenges in criminal defense representation and the appellate review process for ineffective assistance claims. Such appeals often turn on detailed examination of trial counsel's strategic decisions and whether failures to pursue certain legal avenues constituted deficient performance.
The Georgia Supreme Court's review comes as courts nationwide continue to grapple with the standards for effective criminal defense representation. The outcome could affect how Georgia courts evaluate similar claims involving alleged failures to challenge evidence obtained through questionable searches.
Franklin's case also demonstrates the complexity of multi-defendant prosecutions and the procedural challenges that can arise. The initial mistrial and subsequent retrial illustrate the difficulties prosecutors and courts face in managing complex criminal cases with multiple defendants and serious charges.
The co-defendant Cortez Nabors was also indicted in connection with Royal's death, though the current opinion does not detail the resolution of charges against Nabors. Joint prosecutions often present strategic challenges for defense attorneys in deciding whether to pursue unified or separate defense strategies.
The January 21, 2026 decision date indicates the Georgia Supreme Court has recently concluded its review of Franklin's appeal. However, the opinion includes a standard notice that it remains subject to modification through reconsideration motions and editorial revisions before the final version is published in the Georgia Reports.
This procedural notice reflects the Georgia Supreme Court's practice of allowing opportunities for parties to seek reconsideration and for technical corrections before opinions become final. The final version will ultimately appear in the bound volumes of the Georgia Reports as the official text.
The case represents another chapter in the ongoing development of Georgia criminal law regarding ineffective assistance claims and the standards courts apply when reviewing trial counsel performance. The resolution of Franklin's appeal will likely provide guidance for future cases involving similar claims about counsel's failure to challenge evidence through suppression motions.
As the legal proceedings continue, the case serves as a reminder of the critical importance of competent criminal defense representation and the appellate process that allows defendants to challenge their convictions when they believe their constitutional right to effective counsel was violated.