Faniel v. State
291 Ga. 559
| Ga. | 2012Background
- Faniel was convicted of felony murder during aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime in Young’s fatal shooting; the indictment covered events between April 26 and May 3, 2000, with the trial occurring in April 2008.
- Young and Faniel had a tumultuous romantic relationship with frequent fights, including incidents where Young damaged Faniel’s car and Faniel was seen with a handgun.
- Ballistic evidence showed shell casings at the scene and bullets from the same firearm as found in Faniel’s possession; Faniel was known to carry a Glock handgun.
- Evidence included a 2002 incident where Faniel violently threatened Thoms, and a 2004 incident where Faniel attacked Thoms’s boyfriend, with statements indicating a history of violence and threats of murder.
- Lautenschlager, a convicted felon, confessed to the crime in a letter but provided no reliable details and sought money for testimony, which influenced defense strategy at trial.
- Faniel’s trial led to convictions on Counts 2, 3, and 4, with Count 2 life imprisonment and Count 4 a consecutive five-year term; Count 3 merged for sentencing; an appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the circumstantial evidence | Faniel argues evidence is circumstantial and insufficient. | State claims evidence excludes reasonable hypotheses other than guilt. | Evidence sufficient to sustain verdicts beyond reasonable doubt. |
| Admissibility of similar transactions | Three incidents show Faniel’s bent of mind; prejudicial. | Similar transactions admissible for motive/bent of mind with sufficient similarity. | Similar transactions properly admitted; strong evidence supports convictions. |
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel | Counsel failed in multiple respects, including strategy and investigation. | Counsel’s strategy and investigations were reasonable; hindsight not proof of deficiency. | No deficient performance or prejudice shown; Strickland standard not met. |
| Alleged hearsay and closing argument challenges | Counsel failed to object to hearsay and improper closing statements. | Hearsay not established; closing statements not prejudicial. | No ineffective assistance shown for these grounds; no prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lindsey v. State, 271 Ga. 657 (1999) (circumstantial evidence sufficiency; jury resolves conflicts)
- Brown v. State, 288 Ga. 902 (2011) (sufficiency; view evidence in favor of verdicts)
- Moore v. State, 290 Ga. 805 (2012) (admissibility of similar transactions; strict similarity limits)
- Collum v. State, 281 Ga. 719 (2007) (similar transactions focusing on bent of mind; degree of similarity)
- Westbrook v. State, 291 Ga. 60 (2012) (trial strategy and witness credibility; deference to trial court findings)
- Vega v. State, 285 Ga. 32 (2009) (credibility and sufficiency; standard of review for ineffective assistance)
- Chapman v. State, 290 Ga. 631 (2012) (ineffective assistance review; presumptions of reasonableness)
- Jones v. State, 315 Ga. App. 427 (2012) (alibi evidence and trial strategy; no prejudice shown)
- Boring v. State, 289 Ga. 429 (2011) (circumstantial-evidence standard OCGA § 24-4-6)
- Chapman v. State, 290 Ga. 631 (2012) (ineffective assistance; deference to trial court findings)