Georgia Trial Evidence

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

It is so very important to put everything into trial of the case.  It is very difficult to win a case on appeal.  The case of Pounds v. State is a good example where the appellate court, here the Supreme Court of Georgia found error but still allowed a conviction to life in prison without parole to stand.

Can a witness testify to what another person told them even if the other person does not testify at trial?  The general rule is no they cannot.  The Supreme Court of Georgia determined it was error for the trial court to allow into trial the statements of an unavailable witness; however, the court found the error was harmless.  The Supreme Court allowed the conviction to stand.

In the Supreme Court of Georgia, decided: November 5, 2024, POUNDS v. THE STATE William C. Pounds III was convicted of malice murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of Kendra Jackson.  ​ He appealed, arguing that the trial court made several evidentiary errors and that his trial counsel was ineffective.

​Background:

    • The crimes occurred on June 12, 2015.
    • ​Pounds was indicted in December 2015 and tried in October 2017. ​
    • He was found guilty and sentenced to life without parole for malice murder. ​
    • The felony murder count was vacated by law, and the aggravated assault count merged with the malice murder count for sentencing. ​
  2. Incident Details:
    • Pounds had relationships with both Jackson and another woman, Vicinda Crawford, for 10 years.​
    • On June 12, 2015, the day Pounds was supposed to marry Crawford, Jackson was found dead in Pounds’s home. ​
    • Pounds claimed Jackson committed suicide, but his accounts of the events were inconsistent.

​Trial Evidence:

    • The State’s expert testified that Jackson did not have the gun in her hand and was not standing when shot.
    • ​Witnesses testified about Jackson’s positive outlook on life and her future plans, contradicting the suicide claim.
    • ​Jackson’s daughter testified about past incidents of violence (one of which was eight years old) by Pounds against Jackson.

​Appeal Arguments:

    • Evidentiary Errors: Pounds claimed the trial court erred in admitting certain hearsay statements and other-acts evidence.
      1. The hearsay statements introduced at trial were made by Kendra Jackson to her coworkers, Laquisha Jordan and Jackie Bush.

Laquisha Jordan: Jordan testified that a few months before Jackson’s death, Jackson told her that she loved life, her kids, and had plans for the future. Jackson also said that if anyone ever claimed she committed suicide, Jordan should not believe it.

Jackie Bush: Bush testified that she reconnected with Jackson in April 2015.  Jackson expressed sadness about missing out on events in Bush’s life and was excited about participating in future events, such as shopping and decorating for Bush’s baby.

​These statements were admitted under the state-of-mind exception to the hearsay rule, but the court assumed, without deciding, that their admission might have been an error.  ​ However, any error was deemed harmless given the strong evidence against Pounds.

​The state of mind exception is a rule under the hearsay exceptions in the law of evidence.  Specifically, it allows for the admission of a statement that reflects the declarant’s then-existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition.  This can include statements about the declarant’s intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, or bodily health.  The purpose of this exception is to provide insight into the declarant’s state of mind at the time the statement was made, which can be relevant to understanding their actions or intentions.  The state of mind exception is referenced under OCGA § 24-8-803 (3).

    • Ineffective Counsel: Pounds argued his counsel was ineffective for not objecting to a juror who knew Jackson’s stepmother.​
  2. Conclusion:
    • The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible errors in the trial court’s decisions.

If you are looking to do a free consultation with a experienced Georgia criminal defense trial attorney please do not hesitate to contact our law office at 404-581-0999.

Supreme Court of Georgia Clarifies Admissibility of Prior False Accusation Evidence

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

In a landmark decision on September 17, 2024, the Supreme Court of Georgia addressed the rules governing the admissibility of evidence concerning a victim’s allegedly false accusation of sexual misconduct against someone other than the defendant. The case, Gallegos-Munoz v. State, revolved around whether the trial court erred in excluding such evidence based solely on its determination that the evidence did not show a reasonable probability that the prior accusation was false.

Key Points of the Decision:

  • 2013 Evidence Code Prevails: The Court concluded that the rules set forth in Georgia’s 2013 Evidence Code govern the admissibility of prior-accusation evidence, superseding older decisional law that required a threshold determination of probable falsity.
  • Case Background: Gallegos-Munoz was convicted of child molestation based on accusations made by his girlfriend’s daughter. He sought to introduce evidence of a prior false accusation made by the victim against her biological father, which the trial court excluded.
  • Court’s Rationale: The Supreme Court vacated the Court of Appeals’ judgment, directing it to reconsider the admissibility of the prior-accusation evidence under the 2013 Evidence Code, specifically OCGA § 24-4-403 (Rule 403), which involves a balancing test of probative value versus prejudicial impact.

This ruling marks a significant step in clarifying the legal landscape for the admissibility of prior false accusation evidence in sex offense cases in Georgia.

The ruling emphasizes the application of Georgia’s 2013 Evidence Code, particularly OCGA § 24-4-403 (Rule 403). This means that courts must use the balancing test of probative value versus prejudicial impact when considering the admissibility of prior false accusation evidence, rather than relying on older decisional law.

Enhanced Defense Opportunities: Defendants in sex offense cases may have a better chance of introducing evidence of prior false accusations made by the victim. This can be crucial for building a defense, as it allows the jury to consider the credibility of the accuser more comprehensively.

Criminal defense Attorney Scott Smith and our law firm’s lawyers have the experience to combat these allegations with our proven record. If you or a loved one is facing a charge of rape and you feel as though the victim is laying and has lied in the past, it is imperative that you contact our office at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation.

Know Your Rights: What Police Can and Can’t Do in Searching an Automobile

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Oftentimes, we get clients who have been pulled over by the police and ask to search their car. It’s important to know your rights and circumstances in which police can or cannot search your car.

  1. Probable Cause: Generally, police officers need probable cause to conduct a search of a vehicle without a warrant. Probable cause means that there is enough evidence to reasonably believe that a crime has been committed or that evidence of a crime can be found in the vehicle.
  2. Consent: If a police officer asks for consent to search a vehicle and the individual gives consent voluntarily, the officer can conduct the search without needing probable cause or a warrant. It’s important to note that you can not only refuse consent to the search, but you can also tell the officer which area(s) of the vehicle can and cannot be searched.
  3. Search Incident to Arrest: If a person is lawfully arrested, the police may search the area within the arrestee’s immediate control. In the case of a vehicle stop, this may include the passenger compartment of the vehicle, but not the trunk.
  4. Plain View: If a police officer sees evidence in the vehicle and it is immediately apparent that the evidence is something illegal, like narcotics, police can search and seize the evidence.
  5. Inventory Searches: If a vehicle is lawfully impounded, the police may conduct an inventory search of the vehicle’s contents.

If you’re pulled over call us immediately. Know your rights!

Prior False Allegations Are Admissible in a Child Molestation

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

You are accused with child molestation and your accuser has previously falsely accused another person of child molestation. Can you bring up these prior false accusations in your case? The answer is yes.

The Georgia Supreme Court held in State v. Burns, that a defendant in a child molestation prosecution may bring up evidence that the alleged victim has previously made false accusations of child molestation. This evidence is admissible to attack the credibility of the victim and show that the current charges did not occur.

In this case, James Burns was charged with aggravated sexual battery, aggravated sodomy, and incest. It was discovered that the alleged victim had made up a prior rape allegation.

The Rape Shield Statute of Georgia does not prohibit testimony of previous false allegations by a victim. This is because prior false accusations establish that the victim has a propensity to make false statements regarding sexual misconduct. The Rape Shield Statute in Georgia is designed to prohibit bringing up the victim’s past sexual conduct. But it does not protect the victim in cases where a false allegation was made.

A criminal defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to make a full defense. A defendant has the right to bring up prior false allegations where it can be shown that the allegation was indeed false. The Sixth Amendment also grants the defendant the right of confrontation. This includes the right to physically face the person who is testifying against him and the right to conduct a thorough cross-examination. A defendant is guaranteed the opportunity for effective cross-examination.

In addition, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense. The defendant does not have a right to offer any testimony that is either privileged, irrelevant or excluded under the rules of evidence. However, if the defendant has evidence of a prior false allegation of the alleged victim then it is admissible in order to protect the integrity of the trial.

In State v. Burns, the Georgia Supreme Court has made a bright line rule that prior false allegations are admissible, regardless of other rules of evidence.

If you are charged with aggravated child molestation, child molestation, sexual battery, rape or any other sexual offense in Georgia, it is imperative that you aggressively defend yourself and learn everything you can about the alleged victim. If the alleged victim in your case has ever made up an allegation against any other person, you must use this information to your advantage when confronting your accuser in court.

If you are charged with any sexual offense in Georgia, please contact us at 404-581-0999

How Your Defense Attorney Can Use Georgia Rules of Evidence Rule 403 to Keep Out Prejudicial Evidence

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

 

When a person is charged with a crime, the State will often try to present evidence of other bad acts performed by the defendant or evidence that is intended to inflame the passions of the jury. When wielded correctly, Rule 403 gives your defense attorney a weapon to fight back with.

Rule 403 states that “[r]elevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.” This simply means that a judge may decide that certain evidence may not be presented to the jury if it is likely to prejudice the jury against the defendant, is a waste of time, or is unnecessarily cumulative (an example of unnecessarily cumulative evidence would be prosecutors showing a music video where the defendant points guns and claiming it is being shown for identification purposes when other witnesses had already identified the defendant in surveillance footage from the incident) . A 2020 Georgia Supreme Court case says it perfectly: “the major function of rule governing exclusion of relevant evidence due to prejudice, confusion, or waste of time is to exclude matters of scant or cumulative probative force, dragged in by the heels for the sake of its prejudicial effect.” Jernigan v. State, 357 Ga.App. 415.

A recent example of Rule 403 being used effectively was in the Ross Harris case from 2016. Ross Harris was charged with intentionally leaving his son in the hot car where he ultimately died. The State presented evidence of text messages Harris had sent to underage girls as well as large amounts of evidence of Harris’ infidelity. Although Harris was convicted of sex crimes and murder, his attorneys used Rule 403 at his appeal to show that the two crimes (sexual texts with underage girls and murder) should have been tried separately. While the text messages proved he was guilty of the sex crimes, they did nothing to prove Harris’ intent when he walked away from his car and were highly prejudicial when the jury considered the murder charge.

If you find yourself facing serious charges, it is important that you hire a lawyer that understands the rules of evidence and will use every tool available to prevent the jury from hearing prejudicial evidence. The lawyers at W. Scott Smith will explore every aspect of your case and fight for you in the courtroom to give you the best chance of hearing “Not Guilty”. If you face serious charges like rape, murder, child molestation, drug trafficking, or aggravated assault in Fulton, Cobb, Dekalb, Gwinnett, Douglas, Rockdale, or Barrow counties, call our office at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation.

How the Fourth Amendment Could Protect You in Drug Cases

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Fourth Amendment provides safeguards for individuals during their interactions with law enforcement. If evidence is discovered during an interaction that violates an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights, that evidence cannot be used against the individual in court.

This issue commonly arises in cases where an individual is pulled over for a traffic violation and is subsequently charged with possessing drugs. For example, if an officer pulls you over for crossing the solid line, they are not allowed to search your car for drugs if you do not consent to the search. While there are certain exceptions in place to ensure officer safety and to prevent the destruction of evidence (such as patting down an individual on the outside of their clothing to search for weapons, for example), the officer cannot freely look through your pockets or inside your vehicle.

Understanding Fourth Amendment protections is complex, and it is important that you hire an experienced attorney if you are charged with a serious offense like possession of drugs, possession of drugs with intent to distribute, or trafficking drugs. The lawyers at W. Scott Smith, PC will work diligently to discover any Fourth Amendment violations in your case and to keep the harmful evidence out of court. If you are charged with one of these serious offenses in Clayton, Cobb, Dekalb, Fulton, Gwinnett, or Fayette Counties, call our office at 404-581-0999 today for a free consultation.

How Other Acts Evidence Can Benefit a Criminal Defendant

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The State often uses “other acts” evidence to introduce other bad things that a defendant has done to a jury. While the State cannot bring this evidence in to show that the defendant has a bad character, they can bring the evidence in if they can convince a judge that they are doing so to prove something like motive, intent, knowledge, identity, plan, or purpose. These exceptions are all part of the Georgia Rules of Evidence and can be found in O.C.G.A § 24-4-404(b) (often referred to as 404(b) evidence).

But the defense can use these powerful exceptions to their advantage to introduce other bad acts of an alleged victim to the jury (often call reverse 404(b) evidence). Here is an example of how reverse 404(b) evidence could be used to your advantage:

Imagine that you are working in your garage and see a teenager approach your elderly neighbor’s front door. You see the teenager peering in windows and you feel that the teenager is going to harm your elderly neighbor. You approach the teenager, with your firearm by your side, and ask them to leave the property. The teenager reports your behavior to the police and you suddenly find yourself facing criminal charges.

Luckily, you have hired one of the lawyers at W. Scott Smith who begins thoroughly investigating your case and discovers that only two weeks after the incident at your neighbor’s, the teenager is arrested for breaking into another house nearby. By utilizing Rule 404(b) your lawyer is able to introduce this other robbery evidence to a jury to show that the teenager intended to rob your neighbor and that you were justified in approaching the teenager with your firearm.

If you are charged with a serious crime like murder or aggravated assault, it is important that you hire an experienced lawyer who will thoroughly investigate your case and fight to admit any evidence that helps to prove your innocence. If you are charged in Gwinnett, Cobb, Fulton, Dekalb, Clayton, or Newton County, and believe that there is evidence that should be admitted about an alleged victim, call our office at 404-581-0999 today for a free consultation.

When Does a Prosecutor Have to Disclose a Deal Made with a Witness in Exchange for Testimony?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Often, the State will work with co-defendants to offer them a favorable plea deal to testify against another defendant. But, is the prosecutor required to disclose these deals to the other co-defendants or the jury during the trial?  The short answer is found in a 1963 United States Supreme Court case called Brady v. Maryland (373 U.S. 83). The State is required to turn over any evidence that meets four prongs: the evidence must be favorable to the defendant, the defendant must have been unable to obtain the evidence himself, the State must have suppressed the favorable evidence, and, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, there must have been a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different. Williamson v. State, 300 Ga. App. 538 (2009); Brannon v. State, 298 Ga. 601 (2016).

How does this rule apply to statements made by co-defendants in exchange for favorable plea deals?   A co-defendant’s statement could become favorable to a defendant if it calls into question a co-defendant’s credibility. In Byrd v. Owen, 272 Ga. 807 (2000), the Georgia Supreme Court found that the prosecutor was obligated to disclose an immunity agreement it made with its main witness, who was the defendant’s partner in drug trafficking. The Court found that the deal should have been disclosed because, if the defense could have discredited the witness’s testimony (and ultimately shown that he had incentive to lie to get a plea deal), there was a substantial likelihood that the outcome of the trial would have been different. Additional Georgia Supreme Court cases like Schofield v. Palmer, 279 Ga. 848 (2005) tell us that because the reliability of a particular witness may be determinative of guilt or innocence, impeachment evidence, including evidence about any deals or agreements between the State and the witness, falls within the Brady rule, which requires the prosecution to disclose favorable evidence that is material either to guilt or to punishment.

All of this means that if you are charged with a serious crime like murder, armed robbery, or drug offenses, and the State is offering a co-defendant a plea deal in exchange for their testimony against you, they are obligated to disclose that deal. You need an experienced attorney to demand that disclosure and to work diligently to prove that witness unreliable. The lawyers at the Law Office of W. Scott Smith are dedicated to their clients and insist on holding the State accountable to the rules. If you find yourself charged with a serious crime and in need of a lawyer to fight for you, call our office at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation.

 

Polygraph Evidence in Georgia

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Polygraph tests can be a powerful tool in criminal defense. The tests are widely accessible, portable, relatively inexpensive, painless, and simple to administer. However, it is important to understand how polygraphs can be used in court before deciding if a polygraph would be helpful to your case.

In Georgia, polygraph results are only admissible if both parties agree before the test is administered that the results can be used in court regardless of what they results show. This rule comes from the Georgia Supreme Court case State v. Chambers, which was decided in 1977.   That means that your attorney and the prosecutor will have to agree to who administers the test, what questions are on the test, when and where the test is given, and that the results will be admissible during your trial before you take the test. If there is no agreement, the test results cannot be used.

However, the State cannot use your refusal to consent to a polygraph test against you. In Brown v. State, a 1985 Georgia Court of Appeals case, the court reiterated that only the results are admissible, not the fact that a defendant refused to take a polygraph. It is also important to note that a defendant does not have to be represented by counsel at the time they agree to have the results of a polygraph test admitted in court.

Finally, the admission of polygraph evidence is governed by the Georgia Rules of Evidence in that the test must be administered in a reliable manner and the person testifying about the results (the polygraph examiner) must be qualified as an expert.

If you are charged with a serious crime, it is important to speak with an experienced criminal defense lawyer before agreeing to take a polygraph test because once you agree, the results will be admitted in your trial regardless of what the results say. The lawyers at W. Scott Smith are experienced in representing clients charged with murder, rape, child molestation, drug offenses, gang crimes and aggravated assault, and know how to leverage polygraph evidence to benefit our clients. If you are facing criminal charges in Gwinnett, Fulton, Cobb, Douglas, Forsyth, Dekalb, Clayton, or Fayette County, call our office at 404-581-0999 today for a free consultation.

Keeping Evidence of Bad Character Out of Your Trial

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

It is not uncommon in criminal cases for the state to attempt to introduce evidence of other bad things defendants have done. The Georgia Rules of Evidence are very clear that this evidence can not be admitted for propensity purposes. That means the state can’t introduce bad character evidence just to try to make the jury believe that because a defendant acted a certain way in the past that they acted in the same way during the commission of whatever crime they are charged with. For example, if you are charged with armed robbery, the state cannot admit evidence that you were involved in another armed robbery just to say “because he armed robbed someone in the past, he armed robbed someone this time”. But the state will also often try to use the Rules of Evidence to get around this ban on bad character evidence. If the state can convince a judge that they are attempting to bring in the evidence as proof of intent, motive, knowledge, identity, plan, or purpose, they will be allowed to present the evidence.

Additionally, the evidence the state is attempting to introduce should be kept out if any probative value (i.e., usefulness) is substantially outweighed by prejudice to the defendant. It is important to hire an attorney who will zealously fight to keep any bad character evidence out of your trial. At the Law Offices of W. Scott Smith, we fight to protect our clients and will work tirelessly to prevent the state from being able to introduce this bad character evidence to the jury. If you have been charged with a serious crime like murder, rape, armed robbery, or aggravated assault in Fulton, Cobb, Dekalb, Gwinnett, Clayton, or Rockdale Counties, call our office at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation.