Blackmon v. the State
336 Ga. App. 387
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Defendant Willie Blackmon lived with victim S.L. and her family; S.L. alleged sexual abuse beginning around age 12 and reported it at age 14.
- At trial S.L. testified; six other witnesses (aunt, mother, police sergeant, doctor, forensic interviewer, DA forensic director) recounted out‑of‑court statements by S.L. describing the abuse.
- No physical or forensic evidence tied Blackmon to the crimes (DNA negative; medical exam weeks later showed no injuries).
- Blackmon was convicted by a jury of two counts each of rape, aggravated child molestation, and child molestation.
- On appeal Blackmon argued trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to (1) inadmissible hearsay/prior consistent statements, (2) witnesses opining on S.L.’s truthfulness, and (3) an improper jury charge on prior consistent statements.
- The Court reversed the convictions because counsel’s failures were deficient and prejudicial, but held retrial was permitted because the evidence (S.L.’s testimony) was sufficient to support conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Blackmon's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence | S.L.’s testimony alone insufficient? | S.L.’s testimony sufficient for conviction | S.L.’s testimony, viewed favorably to verdict, was sufficient to support convictions |
| Admission of out‑of‑court statements (hearsay/prior consistent) | Statements were inadmissible hearsay; counsel ineffective for not objecting | Statements were admissible as prior consistent statements rebutting attack on credibility | Counsel deficient and prejudicial: many out‑of‑court statements were pure hearsay because they were admitted before any affirmative charge of recent fabrication/influence arose and thus should have been excluded |
| Witness opinion on victim’s truthfulness | Mother and DA forensic director vouched for S.L.; counsel ineffective for not objecting | Some testimony described consistency with objective evidence; admissible | Counsel’s failure to object to mother’s direct opinion that S.L. was telling the truth was deficient and prejudicial; DA director’s testimony (consistency with objective evidence) was permissible and objection would have been meritless |
| Jury charge on prior consistent statements | Charge invited jurors to treat inadmissible prior statements as substantive; counsel ineffective for not objecting | Trial court and State treated charge as appropriate given cross‑examination | Counsel’s failure to object to unwarranted charge was deficient and, cumulatively with other errors, prejudicial; reversal affirmed (plain‑error review unnecessary given ineffective assistance finding) |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 268 Ga. 488 (retrial permitted when reversal is for trial error)
- Woodard v. State, 269 Ga. 317 (prior consistent statement admissible only when veracity is placed in issue by affirmative charges of recent fabrication, influence, or motive)
- Cowart v. State, 294 Ga. 333 (explaining limits on prior consistent statements)
- Baugh v. State, 276 Ga. 736 (prior consistent statements inadmissible absent affirmative challenge to credibility)
- Jackson v. State, 334 Ga. App. 469 (victim’s testimony alone can support conviction)
- Walker v. State, 296 Ga. App. 531 (ineffective assistance where only evidence was victim’s testimony and counsel failed to object to bolstering)
- Roberts v. State, 322 Ga. App. 659 (expert/other witnesses may testify as to whether objective evidence is consistent with victim’s story but may not opine on witness truthfulness)
- Laye v. State, 312 Ga. App. 862 (failure to object to hearsay can be deficient performance)