Davis v. State, 315 Ga. 252

Background

On July 24, 2014, Patricko Davis shot and killed Takeenan Williams during a drug transaction; Davis admitted firing but claimed self‑defense, saying Demetrise Maye pulled a gun.
Eyewitnesses (including Maye and Williams’s girlfriend) described Davis pulling a gun and firing multiple shots; forensic evidence showed seven .40‑caliber casings from a single gun and three bullets from Williams’s body fired from that same caliber firearm. A Taurus .40 box and magazines were found in Davis’s apartment.
The medical examiner found five gunshot wounds including a fatal shot to the back; trajectories were upward and consistent both with shots fired from the ground and with a victim lying with feet higher than head. Crime‑scene evidence suggested the shooter moved while firing.
Davis was indicted November 2014; after pretrial motions and delays, he was tried in February 2017, convicted of felony murder and related firearm possession, and sentenced to life plus a consecutive suspended term.
On appeal Davis raised three claims: (1) violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial (30‑month pretrial delay); (2) trial court erred in excluding “reverse” OCGA § 24‑4‑404(b) evidence of a later Alabama incident involving Maye; and (3) ineffective assistance of trial counsel for not calling a bullet‑trajectory expert and for counsel’s handling of the reverse 404(b) evidence.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Speedy‑trial violation	30‑month delay denied Davis his Sixth Amendment right	Delay attributable partly to docket congestion and partly to defense; Davis delayed asserting the right and showed no actual prejudice	Court affirmed: delay presumptively prejudicial but Barker factors weighed against dismissal because defense shared responsibility, Davis asserted right late, and no actual prejudice shown
Exclusion of reverse 404(b) evidence about Maye’s later Alabama bar incident	Evidence would show Maye’s intent/opportunity to carry a gun and support Davis’s self‑defense claim	The proffered purpose was essentially propensity; trial court never conclusively barred the evidence and defense abandoned attempts to introduce it at trial	Court affirmed: no ruling foreclosing evidence; defendant abandoned the effort, and the evidence would be classic propensity evidence and thus inadmissible
Ineffective assistance — failure to call bullet‑trajectory expert	Expert would have shown back wound consistent with Davis’s account and undermined inference victim was shot while fleeing	Counsel reasonably pursued the same theory via cross‑examination of the medical examiner and elicited admissions supporting shots from the ground	Court affirmed: strategic choice to rely on cross‑examination was reasonable; no deficient performance or demonstrated prejudice
Ineffective assistance — handling of reverse 404(b) evidence	Counsel failed to secure alternate witness after Maye asserted Fifth, losing admissible proof of Maye’s gun use tendency	The proffered evidence was inadmissible propensity evidence; presenting it would not have been proper, so failure to introduce it is not deficient	Court affirmed: counsel not ineffective for failing to present inadmissible evidence

Key Cases Cited

Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (established multi‑factor balancing test for speedy‑trial claims)
Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (addressed presumptive prejudice from post‑accusation delay)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Redding v. State, 309 Ga. 124 (discussed presumptive prejudice and speedy‑trial analysis in Georgia)
Henderson v. State, 310 Ga. 231 (applied Barker factors to state speedy‑trial claims)
Cash v. State, 307 Ga. 510 (weighed delay and prejudice where defendant asserted right late)
Phan v. State, 290 Ga. 588 (allocation of delay when both parties bear responsibility)
Higgenbottom v. State, 290 Ga. 198 (treatment of unexplained delay and weighting against the State)
Fallen v. State, 289 Ga. 247 (speedy‑trial right attaches at arrest or charge)
Johnson v. State, 300 Ga. 252 (procedural framework for reviewing speedy‑trial claims in Georgia)