The Georgia Supreme Court issued an opinion February 3, 2026, in *Graham v. State*, addressing the appeal of Travis Santel Graham, who was convicted of felony murder and firearm possession in connection with the July 5, 2020, shooting death of Jeffrey Jequez Franklin in Lowndes County.
Graham was indicted by a Lowndes County grand jury on December 18, 2020, on charges of felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Following a trial from January 9 to 12, 2023, a jury found Graham guilty on all counts.
The trial court sentenced Graham to life in prison with the possibility of parole for the felony murder conviction, plus a consecutive five-year prison term for the firearm possession count. The aggravated assault verdict merged into the felony murder conviction under Georgia law.
Graham's appeal centers on three primary claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. First, he argues his trial attorney failed to request jury instructions on defense of property other than habitation and a related instruction on forcible felony. Second, Graham contends his counsel failed to object when the trial court did not provide a complete jury charge on defense of habitation. Third, he claims his attorney should have requested a jury instruction regarding Graham's specific character trait for truthfulness.
Additionally, Graham raises a cumulative error claim under *State v. Lane*, arguing that the combined effect of these alleged errors denied him effective representation and a fair trial.
The case proceeded through extensive post-trial proceedings. Graham filed a timely motion for new trial, which he amended twice through new counsel. The trial court conducted two evidentiary hearings in 2024 and 2025 before entering an order denying the motion on March 27, 2025.
Graham filed a timely notice of appeal, and the case was docketed to the Georgia Supreme Court's August 2025 term. Oral arguments were held on August 27, 2025, before the high court issued its February 2026 decision.
Ineffective assistance of counsel claims require defendants to demonstrate both deficient performance by counsel and prejudice resulting from that deficiency. Under the standard established in *Strickland v. Washington*, defendants must show their attorney's performance fell below objective standards of reasonableness and that but for the deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different.
Jury instruction disputes often center on whether counsel's strategic decisions regarding which instructions to request fall within the broad range of reasonable professional assistance. Defense attorneys must make tactical judgments about which jury charges best serve their client's interests, and courts generally defer to reasonable strategic choices.
In Georgia criminal cases, defendants may be entitled to jury instructions on various defenses, including defense of habitation and defense of property. These instructions allow juries to consider whether a defendant's actions were legally justified under specific circumstances. The failure to request such instructions can constitute ineffective assistance if the evidence supports the defense and counsel had no reasonable strategic reason for the omission.
Character evidence instructions permit juries to consider a defendant's reputation for specific traits, such as truthfulness, when evaluating credibility. Whether counsel should request such instructions depends on the strength of the character evidence and the overall trial strategy.
The timing of this appeal reflects the deliberate pace of Georgia's appellate process. From Franklin's death in July 2020 to the Supreme Court's February 2026 decision, the case progressed through investigation, indictment, trial, post-trial motions, and appellate review over more than five years.
Lowndes County, located in south Georgia near the Florida border, includes the city of Valdosta. The county's criminal cases often involve the complex dynamics of a diverse community that includes a major university and significant transient population.
The Georgia Supreme Court's review of this case demonstrates the court's ongoing attention to ensuring adequate legal representation in capital and serious felony cases. Ineffective assistance claims require careful analysis of counsel's performance within the context of the entire trial record.
While the complete text of the Supreme Court's decision was not immediately available, the opinion addresses significant questions about the scope of defense counsel's obligations regarding jury instruction requests. The court's analysis will likely provide guidance for future cases involving similar ineffective assistance claims.
The case also highlights the importance of thorough preparation and strategic decision-making in serious criminal trials, where defendants face substantial prison sentences and the consequences of counsel's choices can significantly impact the outcome.
Graham's case represents one of many appeals challenging murder convictions on ineffective assistance grounds, reflecting ongoing concerns about the quality of criminal defense representation in Georgia's courts.