Brittain v. State
329 Ga. App. 689
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- In May 2007 Chastity Jones was abducted from her Clayton County home, bound, driven to a secluded Cobb County location, threatened at gunpoint, and escaped; her husband Brutus was later found shot to death.
- Brittain was acquainted with the victims through a restaurant-robbery crew; evidence tied him to the scene and to vehicles used.
- Jones later disappeared in June 2008 under circumstances suggesting foul play; she was never located.
- The State introduced Jones’s prior videotaped statements and friends’ hearsay testimony at trial; the trial court admitted them after a hearing under the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing theory.
- The State also obtained pretrial admission (by proffer) of two similar-transaction incidents (the 2006 Atkins murder and a 2007 Blake home-invasion) to show plan, intent, identity, bent of mind, and lack of mistake.
- Brittain was convicted of aggravated assault, kidnapping, and burglary; he appealed raising four primary contentions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Brittain) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion to complete the record for untranscribed DVDs | Trial record incomplete because videotaped interview DVDs played for jury were not transcribed | DVDs were admitted as exhibits and available for review; interruptions were transcribed | Denial of motion to complete record not reversible error; DVDs on record sufficed |
| Admission of Jones’s hearsay/videotaped statements under forfeiture-by-wrongdoing and Confrontation Clause | Court lacked proof that Brittain caused Jones’s unavailability; admission violated confrontation rights | Evidence (circumstances of Jones’s disappearance, cellmate statements, links to Brittain) met preponderance standard showing Brittain procured her unavailability; forfeiture exception applies | Trial court’s finding was supported by a preponderance of the evidence; Confrontation Clause not violated; statements admissible under forfeiture doctrine |
| Admission of similar-transaction evidence (Atkins murder; Blake home invasion) | Incidents not sufficiently connected or similar; improper use of proffer instead of witness testimony | Incidents showed relevant similarities (victims connected to crew members, ligatures, secluded disposal, early-morning home entry with handgun); proffer procedure permitted when cross-examination opportunity preserved | Trial court did not abuse discretion; similar-transaction evidence admissible and proffer procedure acceptable |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel / new trial motion | Multiple failures by trial counsel (various motions not filed, cross-examination omissions, failure to pursue records/witnesses) prejudiced defense | Many claims were vague/abandoned for lack of developed argument; specific challenged acts (e.g., not impeaching cellmate with first-offender info) did not show prejudice | Majority of ineffective-assistance claims were abandoned or without merit; trial court’s denial of new trial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353 (2008) (forfeiture-by-wrongdoing permits admission of prior testimony when defendant procured witness’s absence)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (testimonial statements by witnesses absent from trial generally inadmissible unless witness unavailable and defendant had prior opportunity to cross-examine)
- Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006) (tests for whether statements, including 911 calls, are testimonial)
- Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878) (historic adoption of the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing principle)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)