"The fact that the affidavit mis-cited the statute that Golden was accused of violating is irrelevant. The plain language of OCGA § 17-4-41 did not require the affidavit to identify or otherwise reference the specific statute which Golden allegedly violated. ... Rather, the affidavit had to contain information sufficient to inform Golden of the specific charge against him and of all basic pertinent particulars pertaining thereto. OCGA § 17-4-41(c). The affidavit which served as the basis for the arrest warrant issued against [Golden] satisfies the statutory requirements of, and is in conformity with, [OCGA §§ 17-4-41 and 17-4-45]. The arrest [warrant] was not, therefore, illegal on the ground that the affidavit was improper. Golden v. State, 299 Ga. App. 407, 410, 683 S.E.2d 618, 621 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009) (cert denied) (internal citations omitted).
In addition to all that killing a person stuff, a malice murder charge needs to allege the element of malice aforethought, and a felony murder charge needs to allege the murder occurred in the course of a felony. When the grand jury convenes, it is going to need to clarify which theory the state is going on.
But they didn't need to now, so really, Buford was kind of just wasting people's time.