Cotton v. State
308 Ga. App. 645
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Cotton was convicted of burglary at a bench trial in Fulton County; obstruction charge was acquitted.
- Appeal history is protracted: initial appeal dismissed for failure to file a brief; later out-of-time motions and an amended motion for new trial were pursued.
- Trial counsel did not object to trial court questioning or move for a hearing before a judge who had not taken a co-defendant's guilty plea.
- Trial was nonjury; Cotton argues ineffective assistance due to trial court questioning and lack of hearing.
- Cotton’s motion for new trial was agreed by defense counsel but no testimony was taken, making it difficult to challenge trial strategy.
- Court affirms ruling finding no ineffective assistance and no prejudicial error in the trial court’s conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance from trial court questioning of witnesses | Cotton argues excessive questioning biased the trial. | State contends court may question to develop truth and no abuse of discretion. | No error; questioning within court’s discretion. |
| Failure to obtain a hearing before a different judge on co-defendant plea | Cotton asserts prejudice from lack of hearing on trial strategy. | State argues absence of testimony renders strategy presumption unrebutted. | No reversible error; no prejudice shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shields v. State, 272 Ga. 32 (2000) (trial court may question witness to develop truth; no reversible error absent expressed opinion on facts)
- Jackson v. State, 251 Ga.App. 171 (2001) (court may question to develop truth; discretion of extent of examination)
- Thomas v. State, 306 Ga.App. 279 (2010) (meritless objections do not establish ineffective assistance)
- McRae v. State, 289 Ga.App. 418 (2008) (nonjury trial presumes court can sift legal evidence; jury-influence concerns misapplied)
- Morton v. State, 132 Ga.App. 329 (1974) (judge may question without violating prohibitions aimed at juries)
- Allen v. State, 286 Ga. 392 (2010) (Supreme Court note on judge not being jury; questioning not prohibited for trial court)
- Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932) (extreme prejudice required for due process violation; not shown here)
- United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984) (denial of counsel requires substantial prejudice; not present)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance; failure to show specific prejudice)