Manuel v. State
315 Ga. App. 632
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Manuel and Cedric Clayton had a falling-out; Manuel confronted Cedric outside Cedric's apartment on July 2, 2008 with several friends.
- Manuel pulled a handgun from his right rear pocket and fired at Cedric (twice) and at Daniel Clayton (three times), injuring Daniel with permanent hearing damage.
- Manuel was arrested on July 21, 2008 at his mother's house; police seized a handgun from his right rear pocket, which was not the same gun used in the shooting.
- At trial, the court admitted testimony that Manuel had a handgun on his person at the time of arrest, linking to the charged crime through identification evidence.
- Manuel was convicted of aggravated battery, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony; the appeal challenged admissibility of arrest-handgun testimony and claimed ineffective assistance of counsel; the court affirmed and remanded for ineffective-assistance proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of arrest handgun evidence | Manuel argues arrest-handgun evidence is irrelevant and improper character evidence. | The State contends arrest circumstances are admissible if relevant to identification and not wholly unrelated. | Admissible; not wholly unrelated and timely connected to the charged crimes; within trial court discretion. |
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel | Manuel asserts counsel failed to investigate/procure eyewitnesses for justification defense. | State argues trial record is sufficient; remedy on appeal. | Remanded for a hearing to determine ineffectiveness claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nichols v. State, 282 Ga. 401 (2007) (arrest-related circumstances admissible but subject to relevancy)
- Benford v. State, 272 Ga. 348 (2000) (arrest circumstances judged by same relevancy standards as other evidence)
- Simmons v. State, 251 Ga.App. 682 (2001) (arrest circumstances admissible when arrest relates to charged crime and corroborates victim's version)
- Bogan v. State, 206 Ga. App. 696 (1992) (arrest circumstances admissible when corroborative of identification)
- Nealy v. State, 246 Ga.App. 752 (2000) (arrest timing not too remote to render otherwise relevant evidence inadmissible)