Roswell Man's Murder Conviction Overturned By Ga. Supreme Court

MILTON, GA — The Georgia Supreme Court has overturned the murder conviction and life sentence for a Roswell man found guilty of murdering a teenager over his jewelry. The justices reversed the jury trial's decision and sentence imposed upon Michael Denay Grant, who was convicted in 2014 in the shooting death of Christopher Walker, 19.

The unanimous opinion did, however, uphold the conviction of co-defendant Richard Bernard Davidson, who convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole in connection to the shooting.

"We find no harmful error with respect to Davidson," said Justice Keith Blackwell in the opinion. "We conclude, however, that the trial court erred when it admitted a statement against Grant that law enforcement officers elicited from him in a custodial interrogation after he unequivocally invoked his right to remain silent, and the state has failed to show that this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.”

According to Milton police, Walker was spotted in March 2013 by Davidson, Grant and fellow co-defendant Matthew Goins walking near an Alpharetta Taco Bell wearing a gold chain before the shooting. An indictment previously stated the three followed Walker, an Alpharetta High School graduate, to his home on Silhouette Court in Milton.

As the victim exited his car, Davidson allegedly approached the victim and attempted to snatch his gold chain. A struggle ensued and shots were fired. Walker was shot in the head and later died at North Fulton Hospital. Surveillance video and Crime Stoppers tips led to the identification and arrests of the suspects.

During a trail, Grant was convicted of felony murder, aggravated assault, attempted armed robbery and firearm possession charges while his co-defendant, Matthew Goins, was acquitted on all charges he faced. In a separate trial, Davidson was found guilty of malice murder and sentenced to life without parole. Davidson and Grant appealed their convictions to the court.

According to the Supreme Court's review of the case, Grant was taken to the Roswell Police Department and interrogated by Milton police detectives. A transcript of the interrogation shows Grant refusing to waive his Miranda rights. The officers told Grant he was under arrest, left the interview room for 10 minutes and returned to read the Roswell resident his rights. The detective pressed on, telling Grant he wanted to hear his side of the story.

"If I’m already under arrest, then I’ve got nothing to say about nothing," Grant said, according to the transcript.

That transcript, according to the opinion, goes on show that when one of the detectives asked again, "so you don’t – you don’t want to sign this and waive your rights,” Grant agreed to sign the document, and told his side of what happened.

In his appeal of his conviction, Grant argues the trial court "erred when it admitted the statement in which he attempted to exonerate Goins and managed to incriminate himself," a stance the Supreme Court agreed with.

"The trial court should have granted the motion to suppress, and the admission of the statement was error that requires us to reverse Grant’s convictions," the court adds. “From the review of the record, it seems clear that Grant invoked his constitutional right to remain silent early and often in the interview, but the investigators repeatedly disregarded those invocations and pressed forward with their efforts to elicit a statement from Grant,” the opinion says. “The state argued in the trial court – and continues to argue on appeal – that any invocations that precede the reading of Miranda warnings are ineffectual. The trial court found that argument persuasive. We do not.”

In upholding the conviction for Davidson, the court noted the evidence presented "is legally sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted.”

The court went on to say that while the case against Grant is "considerably weaker," it does believe there is enough evidence that a jury would conclude Grant "is guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted.”

Monday's opinion notes Grant is entitled to a new trial, but it would be up to the state to determine whether they would move ahead in retrying him.

Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard said his office "will definitely retry the case."

"We have represented the state and Fulton County in hundreds of matters before this court, with overwhelming success," Howard added in a statement. "In fact, our decisions outnumber other jurisdictions by a wide margin. It is my hope that readers of the opinion will keep these facts in mind when considering what was said in this single case."

(For more news like this, find your local Patch here. If you have an iPhone, click here to get the free Patch iPhone app; download the free Patch Android app here)

Image via Shutterstock