Boddie v. State
327 Ga. App. 667
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- Kenneth Wayne Boddie was indicted for multiple sexual offenses against his daughter S.B.; a jury convicted him of incest, child molestation, and three counts of aggravated child molestation.
- Victim S.B. testified to repeated sexual abuse by Boddie approximately twice weekly from sixth to seventh grade, with the last incident in January 2009 and outcry in February 2009. The indictment alleged offenses between August 9, 2007 and January 19, 2009.
- Boddie testified at trial denying the conduct but admitted police obtained a statement in which he said he molested S.B.; he claimed the confession was coerced to protect his wife and daughter.
- On appeal, Boddie raised ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims based on (1) trial counsel’s failure to file a special demurrer seeking specific dates in the indictment and (2) insufficient discussion with counsel about the date range and potential alibi evidence.
- At the motion-for-new-trial hearing, trial counsel explained she investigated potential alibi witnesses, concluded an alibi defense was not viable given the alleged recurring pattern over a long timeframe, and made a strategic decision not to demur; the court credited that testimony.
- The trial court denied the new-trial motion; the appellate court affirmed, finding counsel’s performance was not deficient and Boddie showed no prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not filing a special demurrer to require specific dates in the indictment | Boddie: lack of date specificity prevented an alibi defense and prejudiced trial | State: indictment gave a permissible date range for ongoing abuse; specific dates not material; counsel strategically investigated and declined demurrer | Court: No ineffective assistance — counsel’s choice was strategic, dates were not material, and Boddie showed no prejudice |
| Whether counsel failed to adequately discuss the date range with Boddie | Boddie: counsel didn’t sufficiently discuss dates so he couldn’t develop alibi details | State: counsel and co-counsel discussed dates, investigated alibi leads, and determined alibi inappropriate for repeated conduct | Court: No ineffective assistance — record shows discussions and investigation; lack of detailed conference not fatal |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
- Hill v. State, 291 Ga. 160 (ineffective assistance requires deficient performance and prejudice)
- Sarratt v. State, 299 Ga. App. 568 (trial judge’s findings on counsel performance reviewed for clear error)
- Chalk v. State, 318 Ga. App. 45 (failure to demur requires showing it materially impacted defense)
- Eberhardt v. State, 257 Ga. 420 (pattern of ongoing abuse permits range of dates in indictment)
- Adams v. State, 288 Ga. 695 (approximate dates determined by evidence can support indictment allegations)
- Lewis v. State, 304 Ga. App. 831 (date need only be within statute of limitations unless surprise or prejudice results)
- Bufford v. State, 320 Ga. App. 123 (strategic decisions by counsel may preclude ineffective-assistance finding)
- Allen v. State, 318 Ga. App. 531 (strategic, considered choices on charging defects are not deficient performance)
- Moore v. State, 319 Ga. App. 766 (failure to file special demurrer generally not ineffective since re-indictment is possible)
- Ruffin v. State, 283 Ga. 87 (no magic amount of conference time required between counsel and client)
- Morgan v. State, 276 Ga. 72 (upholding denial where counsel’s actions could be reasonable strategy)