Hooks v. Walley
299 Ga. 589
Ga.2016Background
- Walley was indicted for aggravated sexual battery and child molestation, tried, convicted, and sentenced to 20 years (15 to prison). Defense counsel changed from Billy Spruell (arraignment) to Charles Haldi (trial) and then to Brian Steel (post-trial/appellate).
- The State sent a December 28, 2005 letter offering a plea recommending 15 years with 5 to serve in prison (child molestation plea; other charge dismissed); the offer appears revoked after the court ruled certain similar-transaction evidence admissible.
- At a March 23, 2006 hearing Spruell stated he discussed the five-year recommendation with Walley and advised waiting until the similar-transaction issue was decided; Spruell did not recall giving Walley the written offer and testified Walley at times rejected and at times wished to accept the offer as an Alford plea.
- On direct appeal Steel raised other trial issues but did not pursue the claim that Spruell failed to convey the plea offer; at the motion-for-new-trial hearing Walley withdrew that ground and no transcript of that hearing was supplied to the habeas court.
- In habeas proceedings Walley alleged Steel was ineffective for abandoning the claim that Spruell failed to convey the plea offer. The habeas court granted relief, finding both Spruell and Steel ineffective; the Georgia Supreme Court reversed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Walley) | Defendant's Argument (Warden) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate counsel (Steel) was ineffective for not raising Spruell’s alleged failure to convey the plea offer | Steel unreasonably abandoned a meritorious Strickland-based claim that Spruell failed to convey a five-year plea offer | Steel’s choice to withdraw/omit the claim was a reasonable strategic decision; Walley failed to rebut the presumption of sound appellate strategy | Court reversed habeas grant — Walley failed to show Steel’s decision was unreasonably incompetent |
| Whether trial counsel (Spruell) failed to convey the plea offer to Walley | Spruell did not give Walley the written offer and thus counsel was ineffective under Strickland/Frye | Spruell testified he discussed the offer with Walley, advised waiting, and that Walley at times refused or sought an Alford plea; factual dispute exists | Court assumed arguendo Spruell may have been ineffective but did not decide that question because Steel’s effectiveness was dispositive |
| Standard for proving ineffective appellate assistance (issue selection) | Omitted nonfrivolous issues can establish deficiency if decision was unreasonable | Appellate counsel’s issue-selection is presumptively strategic and reasonable; petitioner must show only an incompetent attorney would choose it | Court applied Strickland/Arrington: petitioner must overcome presumption that appellate counsel’s winnowing was reasonable |
| Burden of proof on habeas to show counsel’s strategic choices were unreasonable | Walley contended habeas record established Steel abandoned the claim without reasonable basis | Warden argued Walley did not present evidence (transcript or testimony) explaining Steel’s strategic choice; Steel’s testimony suggested he abandoned weak or conflicting issues | Court: Walley failed to meet his burden; absence of record/transcript and Steel’s testimony supported that the omission was a reasonable strategy |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective-assistance test for counsel)
- Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 134 (failure to convey plea offer can be Strickland deficiency)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (Alford plea doctrine)
- Arrington v. Collins, 290 Ga. 603 (appellate counsel’s issue-selection presumed strategic; petitioner must show unreasonableness)
- Battles v. Chapman, 269 Ga. 702 (applying Strickland standard in Georgia)
- Harris v. Upton, 292 Ga. 491 (appellate counsel may be ineffective for failing to raise valid plea-offer-related trial claim)
- Clowers v. Sikes, 272 Ga. 463 (record must support habeas court findings)
- Perkins v. Hall, 288 Ga. 810 (some findings may be implicit but must be supported)
- State v. Garland, 298 Ga. 482 (appellate review: accept habeas factual findings unless clearly erroneous; apply law de novo)
- Walley v. State, 298 Ga. App. 483 (direct appeal affirming convictions)