Beasley v. State, 305 Ga. 231

In 1998 Beasley returned to a party and, after an altercation, went into a house with a shotgun; Hamm was shot and later died. Beasley claimed self‑defense.
No gun was found on the victim or at the scene; several witnesses said they did not see Hamm with a gun.
Beasley was convicted of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm; after a new trial was granted once, he was reconvicted in 2011 and sentenced to life plus five years.
Beasley filed an amended motion for new trial raising three main claims of ineffective assistance of counsel: (1) failure to object to prosecutor’s alleged comment on pre‑arrest silence; (2) failure to preserve/maintain objection to a jury instruction on the defense of habitation; and (3) failure to object to a temporary courtroom closure during juror questioning.
The trial court denied the motion for new trial; the Georgia Supreme Court reviewed whether counsel’s failures were deficient and prejudicial and whether any instructional or closure errors merited relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Prosecutor commented on pre‑arrest silence (Mallory claim)	Beasley: counsel was ineffective for not objecting to questions/argument suggesting he should have called police or had opportunity to tailor testimony.	State: even if objectionable, evidence disproving self‑defense overwhelms any credibility harm.	Court: No Strickland prejudice shown; other evidence refuted self‑defense, so no relief.
Jury instruction on defense of habitation	Beasley: instruction improper because habitation must be the defendant’s (not the victim’s); counsel asked for continuing objection.	State: instruction permissible; Court of Appeals authority supports giving it when victim’s habitation is implicated.	Court: Objection not preserved as continuing; no plain error because Robison controls; counsel not ineffective for failing to press a meritless objection.
Failure to object to courtroom closure during juror questioning	Beasley: counsel ineffective for not objecting to temporary exclusion of public when juror was questioned.	State: temporary closure was reasonable and could aid defense in probing juror influence/intimidation; tactical choice.	Court: No ineffective assistance; presumption of strategy, and closure could be beneficial—no prejudice shown.

Mallory v. State, 261 Ga. 625 (prohibits prosecutorial comment on defendant’s pre‑arrest silence)
Robison v. State, 277 Ga. App. 133 (upholds habitation instruction even when the habitation defended is the victim’s)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes deficient performance and prejudice test for ineffective assistance)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (legal sufficiency standard for conviction review)
Green v. State, 302 Ga. 816 (applies Strickland framework in Georgia and requires reasonable probability of different result to show prejudice)