829 S.E.2d 163
Ga. Ct. App.2019Background
- Defendant Mark Bradley Boyd was tried by jury and convicted of child molestation (sexual intercourse with 14‑year‑old V.B.) and sexual exploitation of a child (knowingly possessing a digital image of V.B.’s genitals).
- Victim testified Boyd dated her mother, exchanged sexual messages and nude photos with V.B., and that they had intercourse at Boyd’s house on December 15, 2014; Boyd’s phone later contained V.B.’s nude images.
- Police seized Boyd’s phone at his workplace on January 21, 2015; Boyd lived in Coweta County during the relevant period.
- Trial court admitted evidence of two prior incidents in which Boyd had sexual intercourse with girls aged 12–15, limiting the evidence to intent/knowledge.
- During voir dire a juror disclosed she had been molested as a child but stated she could be fair; trial counsel did not strike her and she was seated.
- Boyd appealed, arguing insufficiency of venue for both offenses, erroneous admission of other‑acts evidence, and ineffective assistance for failing to strike the juror. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Boyd's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venue for child molestation | State failed to prove the sexual intercourse occurred in Coweta County | Victim’s testimony placed the house in Coweta County; jury can credit it | Affirmed — victim’s testimony authorized venue finding in Coweta County |
| Venue for sexual exploitation (possession of image) | State did not prove Boyd possessed image in Coweta County | Circumstantial evidence (phone contained image from Nov. 2014 through seizure at his Coweta residence/workplace) supports inference of possession in Coweta County | Affirmed — circumstantial evidence permitted venue inference |
| Admission of other‑acts evidence | Prior acts were unfairly prejudicial under OCGA §24‑4‑403 and should be excluded | OCGA §24‑4‑414(a) admits other child‑molestation acts; probative value for intent/knowledge not substantially outweighed by prejudice; limiting instruction given | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion admitting other‑acts evidence |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to strike juror | Trial counsel was deficient and prejudice resulted because juror was a molestation victim | Counsel’s decision was reasonable strategy; juror said she could be impartial; defendant failed to show deficient performance or prejudice | Affirmed — no deficient performance or demonstrated prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Worthen v. State, 304 Ga. 862 (venue may be proved circumstantially; view evidence favorably to verdict)
- Liggins v. State, 239 Ga. 452 (victim testimony identifying county suffices for venue)
- Olds v. State, 299 Ga. 65 (exclusion under OCGA §24‑4‑403 is extraordinary; review for abuse of discretion)
- Simpson v. State, 298 Ga. 314 (jury‑strike decisions are strategic; ineffective assistance standard)
- Cade v. State, 289 Ga. 805 (appellate review accepts trial court credibility findings; ineffective assistance framework)