Haley v. State, 289 Ga. 515

Haley was convicted by a Hall County jury of committing tampering with evidence under OCGA § 16-10-94 and making a false statement under OCGA § 16-10-20.
He posted two YouTube videos under the username catchmekiller as part of a murder-mystery game referencing Tara Grinstead.
The first video appeared February 1, 2009; the second on February 12, 2009, each containing clues and assertions of killings and involvement of law enforcement.
GBI investigated the Tara Grinstead disappearance; prosecutors introduced evidence tying the videos to Georgia and potential missing-person investigations.
Haley admitted creating the videos but denied involvement in Grinstead’s disappearance; evidence suggested others contemplated targeting him as the creator.
On appeal, Haley challenged OCGA § 16-10-20 as unconstitutional and challenged the sufficiency of evidence for both counts; the Court held for the government on the First Amendment challenge but reversed the tampering conviction for lack of specific intent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of OCGA § 16-10-20	Haley asserts overbreadth and vagueness violate free speech.	State argues statute is constitutional with knowledge/intent that false statement may reach a government agency.	Constitutional as construed; requires knowledge and intent that statement will reach a jurisdictional agency.
Sufficiency of evidence for § 16-10-20	State failed to prove false statement within agency jurisdiction.	State proved false statements were knowingly made with intent to relate to agency action.	Evidence sufficient to prove § 16-10-20 beyond reasonable doubt.
Sufficiency of evidence for § 16-10-94	State proved intent to obstruct prosecution of another person.	No proof Haley intended to prevent apprehension of another person.	Tampering conviction reversed; no proof of specific intent to obstruct another person.

Tesler v. State, 295 Ga.App. 569 (Ga. Ct. App. 2009) (recognizes jurisdictional concept for § 16-10-20 interpretation)
Marcus v. State, 249 Ga. 345 (Ga. 1982) (statutory construction to avoid overbreadth; affirmative act approach)
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (S. Ct. 1974) (false statements are inevitable in free debate; protection for speech)
United States v. Candella, 487 F.2d 1223 (2d Cir. 1973) (false statements anticipating agency jurisdiction may violate § 1001)
Ebeling v. United States, 248 F.2d 429 (8th Cir. 1957) (false statements used in relation to matters within agency jurisdiction)