Richardson v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Richardson’s convictions, holding that the evidence was sufficient under both federal due-process standards and Georgia law. The eyewitness testimony, corroborating evidence, and evidence of Richardson’s confession supported the convictions, and the accomplice-corroboration rule did not require corroboration because the jury could find that the eyewitness was not an accomplice. Even assuming the trial court erred by admitting the recorded statement, the error was harmless because the properly admitted evidence was strong and the recording was cumulative.