Paschal v. the State
335 Ga. App. 411
Ga. Ct. App.2015Background
- In 2009 Paschal and an accomplice, Jacob, executed a home invasion during which victims were assaulted, bound with zip ties, and cash was taken; Paschal purchased masks used in the crime and fled and hid afterward.
- Paschal was arrested shortly after the crimes following flight from deputies and gave a false name; physical evidence tied him to the scene (mask receipt/tags, bandana, zip ties) and eyewitness ID implicated Jacob.
- At trial Paschal was convicted of armed robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, false imprisonment, and related firearms offenses.
- The State introduced Paschal’s 1989 convictions for armed robbery and aggravated assault as “other acts” evidence to show his course of conduct and modus operandi.
- Paschal appealed the denial of his new trial motion arguing: (1) the 1989 convictions were improperly admitted under OCGA § 24-4-404(b); (2) the jury instructions about that evidence were erroneous; and (3) trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to those instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of 1989 convictions as other-acts to show course of conduct | Admission was improper under the new Evidence Code because "course of conduct" is not a listed purpose in OCGA § 24-4-404(b) | The convictions were admissible for the limited purpose of showing course of conduct/modus operandi | Court: Trial court abused discretion admitting them for course of conduct because the new Evidence Code omitted that purpose; but error was harmless given overwhelming evidence of guilt |
| Jury instruction permitting consideration of 1989 convictions for course of conduct/modus operandi | Instruction was reversible error and likely affected jury | Trial court gave limiting instructions and repeated them; no contemporaneous objection to the specific instructions | Court: Reviewed for plain error; no reversal — overwhelming evidence made any error unlikely to affect outcome |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to object to the limiting instruction | Counsel deficient and prejudiced Paschal by not objecting to the jury charge | Counsel had strategy (focus on dissimilarities and 20-year gap); prejudice not shown given overwhelming evidence | Court: No ineffective assistance — strategic choice and no prejudice shown under Strickland |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jones, 297 Ga. 156 (adopts Eleventh Circuit terminology re other acts evidence)
- Bradshaw v. State, 296 Ga. 650 (establishes that the 2013 Evidence Code applies to trials after Jan 1, 2013)
- State v. Frost, 297 Ga. 296 (recognizes Rule 404(b) as a rule of inclusion)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for viewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Barstad v. State, 329 Ga. App. 214 (flight as circumstantial evidence of guilt)