Arick Whitson v. State
A21A0389
| Ga. Ct. App. | Jun 15, 2021Background
- Victim ended a 4-year relationship with Whitson (aka Eric Smith); thereafter Whitson sent harassing e-mails and created fake social media accounts distributing nude photos and defamatory messages.
- Victim obtained a temporary protective order; four days later Whitson filed a police report alleging the victim committed an armed robbery and assaulted his employee; Whitson and his employee submitted pre-typed statements at the station.
- The employee later recanted, testified she signed a statement at Whitson’s direction, pled guilty to filing a false report, and said she didn’t witness the alleged robbery.
- The State introduced other-acts evidence: (1) a prior pattern of similar harassment and false accusations against a former girlfriend (which led to a stalking conviction), and (2) Whitson’s contemporaneous harassing communications and legal filings against the victim (admitted as intrinsic evidence).
- A jury convicted Whitson of making a false statement and making a false report of a crime; Whitson appealed, arguing erroneous admission of other-acts evidence, ineffective assistance for failure to object to some such evidence, and plain error from an indictment notation appearing to show a guilty plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Whitson) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of other-acts evidence about former girlfriend | Testimony about prior harassment and false accusations was inadmissible propensity evidence | Evidence showed common plan, intent, motive and was admissible under OCGA § 24-4-404(b) | Admitted: other-acts were relevant to intent/motive and probative value outweighed prejudice; no abuse of discretion |
| Admission of other acts against the victim (e-mails, filings) | These acts were unfairly prejudicial and should be excluded as "other acts" | These acts were intrinsic to the charged conduct and necessary to complete the story | Admitted as intrinsic evidence; properly linked in time and context to charged offenses |
| Ineffective assistance for failure to object to certain testimony | Trial counsel should have objected to hearsay and other-acts testimony | Many objections would be meritless; failure to object to admissible evidence is not ineffective; most claims waived or unsupported | Denied: counsel not ineffective; appellate waiver and no reasonable probability of different outcome shown |
| Indictment sent to jury showing notation of guilty plea | Indictment mistakenly showed Whitson pled guilty to certain counts and thus prejudiced the jury; plain error review warranted | No contemporaneous objection; jury was instructed not to consider indictment as evidence; plain error review unavailable for this issue | Waived by failure to object; jury instructions cured any potential confusion; no reversible plain error |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (establishes standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- Knowles v. State, 342 Ga. App. 344 (2017) (appellate review standards and ineffective-assistance framework)
- Taylor v. State, 358 Ga. App. 773 (2021) (three-part test for admissibility of OCGA § 24-4-404(b) other-acts evidence)
- Williams v. State, 302 Ga. 474 (2017) (definition and admissibility of intrinsic evidence that completes the story)
- Miller v. State, 309 Ga. 549 (2020) (limitations on application of plain error review in Georgia)
- Lupoe v. State, 300 Ga. 233 (2017) (standards for proving prejudice in ineffective-assistance claims)
- Bradshaw v. State, 296 Ga. 650 (2015) (definition of motive)