Daniel v. the State
338 Ga. App. 389
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- On Nov. 25, 2009, Desmond Daniel opened a fence gate, approached the back door of a house, knocked, then broke into an enclosed rear porch after no answer.
- Inside the house were valuable items (computer, TV, game consoles, leather goods); an 11‑year‑old child was alone and called 911.
- A patrol officer arrived within minutes, heard metal‑on‑metal noise as Daniel tried to gain entry, confronted him with weapon drawn, and Daniel surrendered saying, “You got me.”
- Daniel was charged with burglary (OCGA § 16‑7‑1) — entry with intent to commit a theft — after being found attempting to remove door hinges leading to the interior.
- At trial Daniel did not testify; the State introduced evidence the jury could infer intent to steal.
- Daniel was convicted by a jury and appealed, challenging (1) sufficiency of the evidence, (2) the trial court’s refusal to charge criminal trespass as a lesser included offense, and (3) effectiveness of his trial counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Daniel's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Evidence fails to exclude hypothesis he sought shelter, not theft | Evidence of breaking in toward valuables and actions at scene support intent to steal | Conviction upheld; evidence sufficient to permit inference of intent to steal |
| Failure to charge criminal trespass (lesser included) | Requested trespass charge warranted because entry could have been for shelter, not theft | No testimony or evidence negated intent to steal; no basis for trespass instruction | No plain error; trial court properly refused charge because no evidence supported trespass theory |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel erred by not preserving objection to trespass charge omission and not objecting to court’s recharge | Even if counsel failed, (a) trespass charge lacked evidentiary basis so no prejudice, (b) recharge was legally accurate and not burden‑shifting | Claim denied: Daniel failed to show deficient performance and resulting prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Newsome v. State, 324 Ga. App. 665 (discussing standard of appellate review of sufficiency)
- Byrd v. State, 325 Ga. App. 24 (same)
- Miller v. State, 208 Ga. App. 547 (presence of valuables supports inference of intent to steal)
- Howard v. State, 227 Ga. App. 5 (valubles inside premises sufficient to infer intent to steal)
- Merritt v. State, 292 Ga. 327 (plain‑error standard for unpreserved jury‑charge objections)
- Hiley v. State, 245 Ga. App. 900 (trial court must charge trespass when accused’s testimony negates burglary intent)
- McLeroy v. State, 184 Ga. App. 62 (no lesser‑offense charge required when only evidence shows intent to steal)
- McDuffie v. State, 298 Ga. 112 (Strickland standard articulated for ineffective‑assistance claims)