Durden v. Georgia
Annotate this CaseAppellant Shinderen Durden appealed his convictions for malice murder and other crimes relating to the shooting death of Shannon King. Appellant contended that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of all the crimes of which he was convicted and sentenced. The Court affirmed the convictions and sentences except for Appellant's sentence for aggravated assault, which was vacated, and his felony sentence for tampering with evidence, which was vacated and remanded for resentencing as a misdemeanor.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.