Martin v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Martin’s convictions for felony murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, holding that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient for a rational jury to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also held that the jury was authorized to reject Martin’s alternative hypothesis under Georgia’s circumstantial-evidence statute because the evidence supported his participation in the planned robbery and no firearm was found on the victim or at the scene.