Chapman v. State
318 Ga. App. 514
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Chapman was convicted after a jury trial of attempted burglary and attempted rape in Georgia.
- He asserts ineffective assistance of counsel based on failures to demur to the indictment, move for a directed verdict, request lesser included offenses, and object to introducing damaging character evidence.
- The State sought to admit a prior rape conviction as similar transaction evidence; the trial court admitted it.
- On appeal, Chapman challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, trial court comments on the evidence, and the admissibility of similar transaction evidence.
- The Georgia Court of Appeals affirms, applying the Strickland standard for ineffective assistance and reviewing the evidence and evidentiary rulings for sufficiency and propriety.
- Chapman cannot show prejudice from counsel’s actions and the challenged evidentiary rulings are upheld.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance—demurrer and related rulings | Chapman claims trial counsel failed to file a demurrer and pursue errors | State argues no prejudice; indictment valid | No prejudice; indictment sufficient; no reversible error |
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Evidence was circumstantial and did not exclude innocence | Evidence showed Chapman at scene with intent; prior rape conviction admitted to show intent | Evidence sufficient to support conviction beyond reasonable doubt |
| Admission of similar transaction evidence | Prior rape conviction admitted to prove bent of mind improperly | Evidence admissible to show intent and bent of mind in sexual offenses | Proper admission; no clear error |
| Trial court comments on evidence | Court expressed opinions about credibility/evidence | Court exercised proper control and clarified admissibility | Court did not impermissibly express opinion; no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court 1979) (establishes standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Short v. State, 234 Ga. App. 633 (Ga. App. 1998) (demonstrates limits on demurrers and form of indictment)
- State v. Eubanks, 239 Ga. 483 (Ga. 1977) (demurrers; general vs. special; timing)
- Stinson v. State, 279 Ga. 177 (Ga. 2005) (frequent reference on specificity of predicate offenses)