Lofton v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Lofton's convictions for malice murder and firearm possession, holding that the evidence was sufficient and that none of his challenges to the admission of cell-site records, jury instructions, exhibits, counsel, or jury selection warranted relief. The court held that exclusion was unwarranted because officers reasonably relied on statutory authority and then-binding precedent when obtaining the cell-phone records without a warrant. It also held that the challenged witness was not shown to be an accomplice to the charged crimes, the exhibits were original documentary evidence rather than written testimony, and the Batson finding was not clearly erroneous.