Fields v. State
310 Ga. App. 455
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- Three laptops were stolen from an Office Depot in Fulton County on June 11, 2009.
- Fields was seen in Gwinnett County attempting to sell a laptop to Mukabi for $375; Mukabi paid a $100 down payment.
- The laptop Mukabi bought matched the serial number of one stolen laptop; surveillance and tracking led to Mukabi as purchaser but not Fields.
- Police searched a storage unit rented by Fields after Mukabi described him; they found additional stolen electronics and two other laptops from Office Depot.
- Fields was convicted by a Gwinnett County jury of two theft-by-receiving counts, one theft-by-deception, and one reduction of a count for the golf shirts; one theft-by-receiving count for shirts was reduced to a misdemeanor.
- On appeal, the trial court’s rulings and the sufficiency of evidence for some counts were challenged; the court affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for theft by receiving | Fields was the original thief, not a receiver. | Receiving requires possession of stolen goods; the State failed to prove receiving since Fields was the thief. | Convictions for theft by receiving reversed; Fields identified as the original thief. |
| Discovery violations | State violated discovery rules affecting trial. | Any violation was harmless; no prejudice or bad faith shown. | No abuse of discretion; admissibility preserved; no reversible error. |
| USCR 32.1 notice adequacy | Trial proceeded with inadequate notice. | Fields acquiesced to continuance denial; no reversible error. | No reversible error given acquiescence and circumstances. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Trial counsel was ineffective. | Fields, proceeding pro se, cannot raise ineffective-assistance claims about trial representation. | No relief; pre-trial representation not shown to prejudice. |
| Admission of character evidence (video/photos) | Evidence improperly admitted to show Fields’ character. | Evidence relevant to proving the theft of the laptops; admissible. | No abuse of discretion; evidence relevant to charged offenses. |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. State, 261 Ga. 854 (1992) (receiving requires goods stolen by others; not by the defendant)
- Weidendorf v. State, 215 Ga. App. 129 (1994) (State need not prove defendant did not steal goods)
- Phillips v. State, 269 Ga. App. 619 (2004) (mutually exclusive theories; evidence must show original thief)
- Mullins v. State, 267 Ga. App. 393 (2004) (exclusionary remedy for discovery violations requires prejudice and bad faith)
- White v. State, 255 Ga. App. 228 (2002) (continuance and notice issues basis for non-reversible error when acquiesced)
- Lopez v. State, 259 Ga. App. 720 (2003) (pro se status; pre-trial motions; ineffective-assistance implications)
- Sullivan v. State, 242 Ga. App. 839 (2000) (general scope of admissibility of evidence; abuse of discretion standard)