Buis v. State
309 Ga. App. 644
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Buis was convicted by a jury of theft by taking, entering an automobile with intent to commit theft, and felony fleeing or elude police.
- Buis appealed, arguing trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by not obtaining the duct tape used to bind him in an alleged kidnapping alibi.
- Evidence at trial included: Lane’s pursuit of the stolen trailer, officer pursuit and vehicle search, and items in the abandoned truck linking to Buis (documents, business cards, duct tape recovered by Fulton officer).
- A Fulton County detective interview with Buis about kidnapping was admitted, and a photographic lineup identified Buis in the Conyers chase evidence; cell-phone records showed calls from Conyers vicinity.
- Buis later claimed a kidnapping occurred around 6:00 p.m. on January 1, 2008; he was arrested and indicted for the Conyers crimes.
- At the motion for new trial, the court denied relief; the appellate court upheld the denial, applying a Strickland analysis with deference to trial strategy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was trial counsel's failure to obtain the duct tape deficient? | Buis contends duct tape would bolster alibi and undermine guilt. | State asserts duct tape was cumulative and not needed for defense. | No deficiency; not patently unreasonable. |
| Did the failure prejudice Buis's defense? | Tape analysis would have strengthened alibi evidence. | No proven prejudice; tape analysis not proffered. | Prejudice not proven; no reversible error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chapman v. State, 273 Ga. 348 (2001) (ineffective assistance standard in Georgia)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (test for deficient performance and prejudice)
- Serrate v. State, 268 Ga. App. 276 (2004) (trial strategy and cross-examination as non-reversible decisions)
- Grier v. State, 276 Ga. App. 655 (2005) (evidence deemed cumulative; strategy rationale upheld)
- Hunter v. State, 294 Ga. App. 583 (2008) (prejudice prong requires showing potential benefit of evidence)
- Denny v. State, 280 Ga. 81 (2005) (prejudice analysis for ineffective assistance)
- McDougal v. State, 284 Ga. 427 (2008) (if one Strickland prong fails, court need not analyze the other)