Goodwin v. State
320 Ga. App. 224
Ga. Ct. App.2013Background
- Goodwin was convicted of two counts of child molestation and one count of misdemeanor marijuana possession, with a twenty-years confinement followed by twenty years’ probation sentence.
- The trial court denied Goodwin’s new-trial motion, including ineffective-assistance claims tied to the interview evidence.
- The State presented a Spalding County investigator, the 8-year-old victim, and the victim’s mother as witnesses; the Cobb County detective’s interviews were central to Goodwin’s theory.
- Goodwin sought to introduce hearsay evidence from the Cobb County detective’s interviews, which the trial court excluded due to lack of an in-court custodian and unaffiliated presence.
- During the motion for new trial, Goodwin challenged trial counsel’s handling of the Cobb County detective evidence, failure to call certain witnesses, and the court’s handling of questioning the State’s attorney under oath.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of hearsay from Cobb County detective’s interviews | Goodwin | Goodwin | No error; required accessibility/necessity not established; no ruling on inaccessibility found on record. |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to admit detective evidence | Goodwin | Goodwin | No prejudice; substantial matters were admitted and evidence would not have changed outcome. |
| Trial counsel’s failure to call Goodwin to testify | Goodwin | Goodwin | No deficient performance prejudicial to defense; decision to not testify was trial strategy. |
| Right to question trial prosecutor under oath at motion for new trial | Goodwin | Goodwin | No error; prosecutor not compelled to testify; detective available through other means and was eventually examined. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. State, 291 Ga. 160 (2012) (necessity and inaccessibility standards for former OCGA 24-3-1)
- Wadley v. State, 258 Ga. 465 (1988) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance)
- Chambers v. State, 266 Ga. 39 (1995) (defendant's right to testify is personal; counsel cannot coerce testimony)
- Timberlake v. State, 246 Ga. 488 (1980) (prosecutor as witness generally disfavored; discretion to allow)
- Castell v. Kemp, 254 Ga. 556 (1985) (prosecutor-witness concerns; limits on calling opposing counsel)
- United States v. Roberson, 897 F.2d 1092 (11th Cir. 1990) (prosecutor as defense witness generally not required)
- Louisiana v. Tuesno, 408 S.2d 1269 (La. 1982) (trial court’s discretion on witness-call decisions)