Howard v. State
298 Ga. 396
Ga.2016Background
- On August 5, 2007, Stanley Howard and several others were at Lebaron Douse’s house when 16‑year‑old Damien Wright approached waving a pistol; an exchange of words followed.
- Howard retrieved an AK‑47 from his car, confronted Wright at the driveway, and shots were fired; Wright died from gunshot wounds.
- Witness testimony conflicted as to who fired first; some witnesses described one soft shot followed by three louder shots; three 7.62 shell casings consistent with an AK‑47 were found near the victim.
- Physical evidence suggested a bullet had been fired from Wright’s direction; Wright’s BAC was .112. Howard fled the scene and was apprehended nearly two years later.
- Howard was indicted for malice murder, felony murder (aggravated assault), and firearm possession; convicted on malice murder and firearm possession; felony‑murder conviction vacated; sentenced to life plus five years consecutive.
- Howard appealed, arguing (1) insufficiency of evidence because he acted in self‑defense, and (2) ineffective assistance of trial counsel for not testing blood spatters and for failing to present victim‑propensity evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency / self‑defense | Howard: evidence supports self‑defense; he reasonably feared imminent unlawful force. | State: jury could find Howard was the aggressor and reject self‑defense; evidence supports convictions. | Court: Evidence sufficient to reject self‑defense and sustain convictions. |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to test blood spatters | Howard: counsel should have tested blood that might have matched Howard’s alleged wound and supported self‑defense; omission was deficient. | State: counsel made strategic choice to avoid testing; Howard cannot show the untested evidence would have been favorable or changed the outcome. | Court: No prejudice shown under Strickland; claim fails. |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to present victim‑propensity evidence | Howard: counsel should have introduced prior incidents and gang‑related tattoo evidence to show victim’s propensity for violence. | State: trial counsel elicited some evidence of prior shooting and instigation; tattoo link speculative and gang membership not equivalent to specific violent acts. | Court: Even if deficient, Howard failed to show prejudice; claim fails. |
Key Cases Cited
- Andrews v. State, 267 Ga. 473 (reasonable fear standard for justification)
- Roper v. State, 281 Ga. 878 (jury’s role in assessing self‑defense)
- White v. State, 287 Ga. 713 (jury may reject self‑defense)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑part ineffective assistance standard)
- Whitus v. State, 287 Ga. 248 (speculation insufficient to show prejudice)
- Valentine v. State, 293 Ga. 533 (prejudice requirement for IAC)
- Graham v. State, 274 Ga. 696 (procedural requirements for introducing prior acts to prove justification)
- Kolokouris v. State, 271 Ga. 597 (gang membership is not a specific act of violence)
- Thompson v. State, 286 Ga. 891 (credibility issues for jury determination)