Revere v. State, 302 Ga. 44

Background

Victim Angelo Patterson ran a nonprofit mentoring released felons; defendant Jermaine Revere was one mentee. Patterson picked Revere up on August 16, 2011; Revere stabbed Patterson in the neck and back, took Patterson’s wallet, and left in Patterson’s car. Revere later drove to a probation appointment in Patterson’s car.
Revere was indicted for malice murder, felony murder (aggravated assault predicate), aggravated assault, theft by taking, and possession of a knife during a felony; after a jury trial he was convicted on all counts and sentenced to life plus additional terms.
At trial Revere testified the stabbing was accidental and in self-defense after an alleged unwanted sexual advance by Patterson; he claimed he grabbed a knife and accidentally inflicted the wounds and later dropped the knife onto Patterson.
Medical examiner testimony contradicted Revere’s account: neck wound showed both stab and cutting components consistent with deliberate force while the victim was turning away; the back wound could not have resulted from a knife dropped from six feet or less.
Revere appealed solely on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds, arguing trial counsel should have objected to State witnesses’ testimony praising Patterson’s character and should have introduced evidence of Patterson’s prior sexual-offense convictions to rebut that character evidence.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Revere)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
1. Whether counsel was deficient for failing to object to State witnesses’ testimony that Patterson was a “good dude,” “like a father,” and “not that kind of person.”	Revere: Counsel should have objected/moved for mistrial because these unsolicited statements improperly placed victim’s character in issue.	State: Testimony did not prejudice the verdict given the totality of evidence showing purposeful stabbing.	Court: Counsel’s failure to object was deficient, because Rule 404(a)(2) bars prosecutor rebuttal character evidence until defendant first introduces victim-character evidence. No prejudice shown; conviction stands.
2. Whether counsel was ineffective for not introducing Patterson’s alleged prior convictions/sexual-offense acts to rebut State’s good-character evidence.	Revere: Counsel could have introduced prior crimes to impeach/rebut Patterson’s good character (Chandler exception / opened-the-door).	State: Chandler exception does not survive under Georgia’s new Evidence Code; and Revere failed to present certified prior-conviction evidence at motion hearing.	Court: Argument fails—Chandler is inapplicable under the new Evidence Code and Revere offered no admissible proof of prior convictions at post-trial hearing; no ineffective assistance.
3. Whether the new Georgia Evidence Code allows the State to introduce victim-good-character evidence in its case-in-chief.	Revere: (implicit) State improperly introduced good-character evidence before he put character at issue.	State: Relied on evidence and legitimacy of convictions and trial context.	Court: Under OCGA §§ 24-4-404 and 24-4-405, prosecution may only rebut after defendant opens the door; State’s testimony was inadmissible when offered in its case-in-chief.
4. Prejudice standard under Strickland—whether omitted objections likely changed outcome.	Revere: Failure to object likely affected jury’s assessment of self-defense and credibility.	State: Medical and forensic evidence and Revere’s admission of stabbing overwhelmingly supported guilt; no reasonable probability of a different result.	Court: Applying Strickland, no reasonable probability of a different outcome; prejudice not established, so ineffective-assistance claim fails.

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (jury credibility and sufficiency standard)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test)
Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (heavy burden to show Strickland prejudice)
Chandler v. State, 261 Ga. 402 (prior Georgia rule permitting certain victim-specific acts evidence; held inapplicable under new Evidence Code)
Mohamud v. State, 297 Ga. 532 (new Evidence Code supersedes Chandler-based exception)
Ballard v. State, 297 Ga. 248 (need certified prior convictions to prove prior-conviction evidence)
Arnold v. State, 292 Ga. 268 (discussing burden to show reasonable probability of different outcome)