Gaston v. State, 307 Ga. 634

Background

In November 2011 Terrance Walker was shot multiple times and died; no gun was found on his person. Three different caliber casings (.40, .38, 9mm) were recovered and a .40-caliber bullet and a .38-caliber bullet were found in Walker.
Witnesses placed Lerenzo Gaston at or near the scene: one eyewitness (Kimberly Seaborn) identified Gaston in a police lineup but recanted at trial; another witness (Walker’s brother) saw Gaston flee; Gaston was known to carry .40 and 9mm handguns.
Gaston had a prior altercation with Walker after a prostitution-related dispute; Gaston allegedly threatened to “shoot the place up.” Gaston later was seen telling Maegan Bostic, “I got him. You’re next.” His ex‑girlfriend Jaquita Mack testified Gaston admitted killing someone.
Gaston was indicted and tried; jury acquitted him of malice murder but convicted him of felony murder (predicated on aggravated assault), aggravated assault (merged), and possession of a firearm during a felony. He was sentenced to life plus five years.
On appeal Gaston argued ineffective assistance of counsel based on four alleged failures by trial counsel: (a) not requesting a justification/self‑defense jury charge; (b) not objecting to certain prosecutor closing arguments; (c) not objecting to admission of a prior consistent statement (a text) by Mack; and (d) not eliciting/exposing Seaborn’s prior interview statements that she did not see Gaston shoot.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Failure to request justification/self‑defense charge	Gaston: counsel should have requested a self‑defense instruction — slight evidence (multiple shooters, third‑party blood) supported it.	State: evidence of justification was at best slight and counsel strategically pursued misidentification; presenting conflicting defenses (misidentification vs self‑defense) risked credibility; counsel’s choice reasonable.	No ineffective assistance: no prejudice shown; justification evidence weak and counsel’s strategy reasonable.
Failure to object to prosecutor’s closing about a text asking for a gun	Gaston: prosecutor argued facts outside the record when asserting Gaston sent the gun text.	State: phone records in evidence and testimony that Gaston sometimes texted from other numbers permitted an inference that Gaston sent the text.	No ineffective assistance: prosecutor’s inference was permissible; objection would have been meritless.
Failure to object to admission of Mack’s prior consistent statement (text)	Gaston: text was hearsay/implied hearsay and Mack lacked personal knowledge when she sent it; counsel should have kept it out.	State: trial court already overruled pretrial objection; counsel need not renew; strategic decision not to draw attention to it.	No ineffective assistance: counsel had already objected; choice not to renew was reasonable trial strategy.
Failure to elicit Seaborn’s prior statement that she did not see shooter	Gaston: counsel failed to cross‑examine to expose that Seaborn told investigators she didn’t see Gaston shoot.	State: counsel elicited through other means that Seaborn did not see the shooting and reasonably focused cross on other witnesses; scope of cross is tactical.	No ineffective assistance: counsel introduced the favorable portion and stressed inconsistencies at closing; tactical decision was reasonable.

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Romer v. State, 293 Ga. 339 (objective‑reasonableness standard for counsel performance)
Swanson v. State, 306 Ga. 153 (applying Strickland framework)
Williams v. State, 297 Ga. 460 (entitlement to instructions when slight evidence supports alternative theories)
Wainwright v. State, 305 Ga. 63 (slight‑evidence rule for requested charges)
McClure v. State, 306 Ga. 856 (strategic risks of inconsistent defense theories)
Cooper v. State, 296 Ga. 728 (prosecutor permitted to draw reasonable inferences from evidence)