Lee v. State
308 Ga. App. 711
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Lee was convicted after a jury trial of aggravated assault, armed robbery, and concealing the death of another person in connection with Gerald Stinson’s shooting death (July 16, 2005).
- Jonas Blue, who pled guilty to related charges, testified that he and Lee planned to rob Stinson and that Lee later shot Stinson and helped dispose of the body and Stinson’s truck.
- Police found Stinson’s body in an abandoned truck; Lee’s house yielded Stinson’s truck keys, a similar survival knife, and magazines belonging to Stinson under Lee’s mother’s mattress; Stinson’s belongings appeared in Lee’s possession shortly after the crime.
- A year later, authorities searched Lee’s house again but found no forensic link or weapon connected to the shooting.
- Lee challenged evidentiary rulings and the trial court’s refusal to hear ineffective assistance of counsel claims raised in an amendment to the motion for new trial; the Court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for further proceedings on the IAC claims.
- The trial court had limited amendments to the motion for new trial; conflict-free counsel later advised Lee to amend, and the court agreed to a hearing on the amended claims but later refused to consider them.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of age evidence | Lee argues age evidence shows Blue’s leadership by youth. | State contends age specifics were unnecessary; any error harmless. | Error but harmless; no reversible impact. |
| Admission of bad character testimony | Lee did not place his character in issue; the testimony imputed bad character. | The testimony was relevant to Lee’s behavior in a crowd. | Court abused discretion, but error harmless given overwhelming guilt evidence. |
| Right to effective assistance claims in new-trial amendment | Lee had right to a hearing on IAC claims raised via amendment; conflict-free counsel allowed. | Court treated amendment as exceeding earlier restrictions. | Court erred by not considering amended IAC claims; remand for evidentiary hearing. |
| Scope of amendments to motion for new trial | Amendment timely and properly filed. | Amendment improperly broadened scope beyond court’s restriction. | Partial error; remand to adjudicate amended claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Manley v. State, 287 Ga. 338, 698 S.E.2d 301 (2010) (Ga. 2010) (harmless error when other evidence supports the verdict)
- Moon v. State, 202 Ga.App. 500, 414 S.E.2d 721 (1992) (Ga. App. 1992) (evidence of general character weighed in light of broader testimonial context)
- Donaldson v. State, 279 Ga.App. 407, 631 S.E.2d 443 (2006) (Ga. App. 2006) (bad character evidence beyond scope must be supported by defense placement of issue)
- Sweet v. State, 278 Ga. 320, 602 S.E.2d 603 (2004) (Ga. 2004) (gun ownership alone not inherently bad character)
- Moon v. State, 202 Ga.App. 500, 414 S.E.2d 721 (1992) (Ga. App. 1992) (witness testimony about gun-carrying can place general character in issue)
- Sharpe v. State, 288 Ga. 565, 707 S.E.2d 338 (2011) (Ga. 2011) (erroneous admission harmless given strong evidence of guilt)
- Cooper v. State, 249 Ga.App. 881, 549 S.E.2d 829 (2001) (Ga. App. 2001) (amendment timing and scope under OCGA 5-5-40(b) guidance)
- Swint v. State, 279 Ga.App. 777, 778, 632 S.E.2d 712 (2006) (Ga. App. 2006) (amendment rights and standards for new trial motions)