Davenport v. State
316 Ga. App. 234
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Davenport was convicted after a jury trial of rape, solicitation of sodomy, and incest under Georgia statutes.
- The victim was the defendant’s stepdaughter, and Davenport married the victim’s mother in October 2003, when the victim was 13.
- From 2003 to 2009, Davenport engaged in frequent sexual activity with the victim, including multiple assaults and threats to keep her silent.
- The abuse occurred at the family home and later resumed after 2004, with the victim eventually reporting the conduct to others.
- Davenport challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, prosecutorial remarks during closing, his counsel’s effectiveness, and a subpoena for prosecutor’s notes, all of which the trial court and appellate court addressed and denied relief on.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for incest, rape, and solicitation | Davenport argues the evidence is insufficient | State argues evidence is sufficient | Evidence sufficient for all three convictions |
| Mistrial for improper closing remarks | Improper future-dangerousness comments require mistrial | No manifest necessity; curative instruction adequate | No error; no sua sponte mistrial required |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Alibi defense or evidence not adequately pursued | No deficient performance proven; strategic/insufficient prejudice | No merit to ineffective-assistance claim |
| Quashing subpoena for prosecutor's notes | Notes are relevant; must be produced | Notes not shown to be relevant or material | No abuse of discretion; subpoena properly quashed |
Key Cases Cited
- Siharath v. State, 246 Ga. App. 736 (Ga. App. 2000) (victim’s testimony can suffice to prove rape; lack of consent can be inferred from fear or prior experiences)
- Williams v. State, 284 Ga. App. 255 (Ga. App. 2007) (force may be inferred from the relationship and ongoing abuse)
- Wyatt v. State, 267 Ga. 860 (Ga. 1997) (prosecutor’s comments on future dangerousness improper; mistrial not automatic)
- Wilkes v. State, 221 Ga. App. 390 (Ga. App. 1996) (reversal where manifest necessity for mistrial not shown)
- Gonzalez v. State, 310 Ga. App. 348 (Ga. App. 2011) (trial court’s discretion in ruling on mistrial and curative measures)
- Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (Ga. 2009) (single witness testimony generally admissible to establish a fact)
- House v. State, 236 Ga. App. 405 (Ga. App. 1999) (evidence of repeated assault supports force element)
- Jones v. State, 315 Ga. App. 427 (Ga. App. 2012) (alibi evidence requirements; prejudice standard for ineffective-assistance claims)
- Herrington v. State, 285 Ga. App. 4 (Ga. App. 2007) (absence of corroborating alibi evidence defeats ineffective-assistance claim)
- Marshall v. State, 265 Ga. App. 556 (Ga. App. 2004) (trial court’s assessment of alleged prosecutorial failures reflects deferential review)