Woman convicted of killing ex-husband granted new trial

ALBANY — A Dougherty County woman convicted of murdering her ex-husband is entitled to a new trial under a ruling by the Georgia Supreme Court, according to the summary of opinions report published Monday by the Public Information Office of the Supreme Court of Georgia.

For years, Marlina Hamilton allegedly suffered beatings and even rape at the hands of her boyfriend and eventual husband, Christopher Donaldson, before she shot and killed him on Oct. 11, 2010, according to reports.

In her March 2011 trial, defense attorney Johnny Graham argued that Hamilton had shot Donaldson in self-defense due to battered person syndrome. The defense presented an expert witness who testified on the syndrome; the State did not present any contrary expert testimony.

During the trial, District Attorney Greg Edwards argued that the case exemplified what a domestic violence victim should not do, which was meet violence with violence.

“You cannot take the law into your own hands if you are a victim,” said Edwards. “She (Hamilton) did not seek out the resources available to her: the police, restraining orders or her own family and friends. We cannot help domestic abuse victims if they do not ask for help.”

Both attorneys in the trial stated that the testimony was contradictory and perhaps unreliable. Prosecution witnesses had no recollection of Hamilton having been bruised from beatings, while defense witnesses did recall bruising.

According to Edwards, although Hamilton claimed she was in an abusive relationship with Donaldson that stretched back to 2001, she did not report the violence until 2010.

During the trial, Edwards advised the jury to “cling to the things of which there is no doubt.”

“There are rules in society,” Edwards said. “Battered persons syndrome is not a license to kill. The direction she (Hamilton) chose, a gun and a knife, resulted in Christopher Donaldson’s death.”

The Dougherty County jury spent about 90 minutes in deliberation before finding Hamilton guilty of felony murder and sentencing her to life in prison.

However, in 2015, the trial judge, using his discretion to sit in as a “thirteenth juror,” granted Hamilton’s motion for a new trial, concluding that the jury’s guilty verdicts were “decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence” and “contrary to the principles of justice and equity.”

State prosecutors appealed that ruling to the Georgia Supreme Court.

In Monday’s opinion granting Hamilton a new trial, Justice David Nahmias wrote, “we affirm it,” for a unanimous court.

According to the facts of the case, Hamilton and Donaldson began dating in 2000, moved in together in 2001 and had a son. Hamilton also had a son, D’Angelo, from a previous relationship. At trial, several witnesses testified that over the years, Donaldson physically abused Hamilton on multiple occasions.

According to the trial summary, beginning in 2001, Donaldson beat Hamilton after accusing her of cheating on him. He beat her after blaming her for a burglary of their home, and he beat her and hit her in the stomach with a broom after an argument.

Hamilton’s friend, Angela Whitaker, testified that she saw bruises on Hamilton’s arms and legs, and Hamilton told her they were from fights with Donaldson. Following one of those fights, Whitaker had to remove a piece of glass from Hamilton’s back.

When Hamilton became pregnant with twins in 2004, Donaldson punched her in the mouth and said he did not want the babies, according to the summary.

She subsequently had an abortion and moved in with her mother, but the couple reunited in 2005. That same year, Donaldson was arrested for drug crimes. After his attorney suggested he would receive a lighter sentence if the couple wed, the two got married in 2006. She eventually found out he was cheating on her and filed for divorce, which became final in 2008, according to reports.

The summary states that Donaldson was released from prison in March 2010, and three months later he asked Hamilton to move back in with him. When she refused, he punched her several times and raped her in her home. As a result, Hamilton again became pregnant and again had an abortion.

In August of that year, reports indicate that Donaldson became angry about Hamilton’s relationship with another man, and he hit her in the face and punched her in the side in front of her children and yet, in October, she agreed to let him move into her home in Albany.

According to her testimony at her murder trial, the evening of Oct. 11, 2010, Donaldson became angry at her and started punching her with his fists and threatening Hamilton. She went to the bathroom and sent a text message to her friend, asking her to call police.

Officers responded about 11 p.m., ordered Donaldson to leave and gave Hamilton information on how to get assistance for domestic violence.

According to reports, after police left, Donaldson returned to the home, let himself in, and when Hamilton asked him to leave, he began pacing back and forth. Donaldson then hit Hamilton in the back of her head. When he swung at her again, Hamilton grabbed a gun that she had under the sofa and shot him twice in the lower body.

Reports indicate, Donaldson then began beating and choking her as they wrestled for the gun. He pointed the gun at her, but she was able to remove the magazine. He then hit her in the head with the gun and punched her. Meanwhile, her son, D’Angelo, called police and pulled Donaldson off his mother. When police arrived, Hamilton was waiting on the porch. She told them she “felt like he was going to kill her that night.”

In April 2011, Hamilton’s attorney filed a motion requesting a new trial. By then, she had a new attorney, who raised several claims, including “ineffective assistance” by her trial attorney for failing to do a number of things during trial, including failing to call a nurse who would have corroborated the claims of Donaldson’s abuse of Hamilton.

In September 2015, Hamilton was granted a new trial, but the state filed an appeal with the Georgia Supreme Court.

According to Monday’s opinion, two Georgia statutes are at issue in this case. Georgia Code § 5-5-20 states that, “In any case when the verdict of a jury is found contrary to evidence and the principles of justice and equity, the judge presiding may grant a new trial before another jury.”

Georgia Code § 5-5-21 states that the presiding judge may also grant a new trial, “where the verdict may be decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence even though there may appear to be some slight evidence in favor of the finding.”

The Georgia Supreme Court found that, “The evidence presented at trial and summarized above was, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdicts, legally sufficient to authorize a rational jury to reject Hamilton’s claim of self-defense and find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which she was convicted.”

However, the opinion found that the state was “incorrect,” in asserting that “because the evidence was sufficient under the due process standard, the trial court erred in granting a new trial under § 5-5-20 and § 5-5-21.”

“As this Court has clearly explained: Even when the evidence is legally sufficient to sustain a conviction, a trial judge may grant a new trial if the verdict of the jury is ‘contrary to … the principles of justice and equity,’ § 5-5-20, or if the verdict is ‘decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence, § 5-5-20,’” the opinion says.

“In this case, the trial court explained that after it carefully reviewed the trial transcript and exhibits and ‘considered the conflicts in the evidence, the credibility of the witnesses, and the weight of their testimony,’ it had concluded that the jury’s guilty verdicts were ‘decidedly and strongly against the weight of the evidence’ and ‘contrary to the principles of justice and equity,’” the opinion says. “The court therefore exercised its discretion to grant a new trial. Having reviewed the record, we cannot say that this conclusion was an abuse of the trial court’s substantial discretion to act as the ‘thirteenth juror’ in the case.”

The opinion concludes by noting that because the evidence at Hamilton’s first trial was constitutionally sufficient to support the jury’s guilty verdicts, the state may elect to retry her on those counts. “However the case is resolved, the parties and the trial court should proceed with dispatch, given that Hamilton has already served more than five years in prison,” the opinion says.