Collins v. State
310 Ga. App. 613
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Collins was convicted by a jury of six counts of child molestation and three counts of aggravated child molestation in Georgia.
- J.H., Collins's stepdaughter, testified she was 12–13 when Collins began molesting her, including vaginal intercourse that she described as painful.
- Forensic interview and medical examination in 2003 supported J.H.’s allegations of sexual abuse and injury to hymen.
- The State presented evidence of similar transactions: S.R. testified about touching her vagina and exposure by Collins; in 1989 Collins pled guilty to aggravated child molestation involving a younger cousin, T.R., who was hospitalized from injuries.
- C.R., T.R.’s sister, testified that Collins touched her breasts in 1990 when she was 11, showing a pattern of molesting young children.
- The defense argued J.H.’s allegations lacked dates; witnesses testified Collins had moved out of the residence by the time of the later alleged acts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of rape shield evidence | Collins argues J.H.’s sexual history testimony violated OCGA § 24-2-3(a). | State contends testimony was necessary to explain injury and charged act; not a virginity claim. | Harmless error; testimony cumulative and did not affect verdict. |
| Admissibility of similar transaction evidence from 1990 conviction | Evidence was too remote and dissimilar (nine- or ten-year-old victim) to be admissible. | Evidence showed defendant’s lustful disposition and corroborated testimony; time lapse allowed. | Properly admitted; admission within discretion; substantial similarity shown. |
| Ineffective assistance for not challenging similar transaction evidence | Failure to object on lack of similarity prejudiced Collins. | Since evidence was admissible, claim meritless. | No merit; correct ruling on admissibility defeats claim. |
| Motion for mistrial based on DFACS witness testimony | Testimony about sex with J.H.'s friends was prejudicial double hearsay. | remarks were fleeting and unresponsive; properly mitigated by other evidence. | Denied; no abuse of discretion; any prejudice cured by other admissible evidence. |
| Improper voir dire questions | Challenged questions improperly prejudged jurors. | Questions permissible to reveal bias; discretion to trial court. | Voir dire questions proper; trial court did not abuse discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence; weighing evidence in favor of verdict)
- Tidwell v. State, 306 Ga.App. 307 (Ga. App. 2010) (admissibility of evidence to show different perpetrator; extent of injuries)
- Maher v. State, 216 Ga.App. 666 (Ga. App. 1995) (cumulative or harmless error when prior testimony exists)
- Osmer v. State, 275 Ga.App. 506 (Ga. App. 2005) (harmless error; cumulative evidence considerations)
- Ranalli v. State, 197 Ga.App. 360 (Ga. App. 1990) (mistrial rulings; fleeting improperly admitted remarks)
- Copeland v. State, 276 Ga.App. 834 (Ga. App. 2005) (similar transaction evidence; time lapse affects weight, not admissibility)
- Brown v. State, 275 Ga.App. 281 (Ga. App. 2005) (similar transactions; sufficient similarity despite age differences)
- Hall v. State, 287 Ga. 755 (Ga. 2010) (time lapse as weight/credibility factor in similar transaction evidence)
- Stewart v. State, 262 Ga.App. 426 (Ga. App. 2003) (voir dire scope; discretion of trial court)
- Childers v. State, 228 Ga.App. 214 (Ga. App. 1997) (voir dire; prevention of prejudgment; proper scope)
- Maynard v. State, 282 Ga.App. 598 (Ga. App. 2006) (age of prior incidents; admissibility balanced by probative value)