Roseboro v. State
308 Ga. 428
Ga.2020Background:
- On November 28, 2015, Raekwon Roseboro and co-defendant Hoye Anderson were involved in a drug transaction that ended with the shooting death of Willie Jackson and the aggravated assault of Kendrick Ellison.
- A DeKalb County grand jury indicted Roseboro on multiple counts including malice murder; Anderson later pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter and agreed to testify against Roseboro.
- Ellison identified Roseboro as the shooter both in a photo taken from Anderson’s phone (after the prosecutor let Ellison view the phone) and in court; Anderson also testified he saw Roseboro shoot into Jackson’s car.
- Roseboro’s trial counsel did not move to suppress the photo identification and did not call Detective Lynn Shuler (the lead detective) to impeach Ellison’s claim of a prior photo-text identification; trial counsel instead cross-examined Ellison about the alleged prior identification.
- A jury convicted Roseboro on all counts; the trial court denied a motion for new trial, and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed, concluding counsel was not constitutionally ineffective.
Issues:
| Issue | Roseboro's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counsel ineffective for failing to move to suppress Ellison’s photo identification | Prosecutor-led photo viewing of Anderson’s phone was impermissibly suggestive; counsel should have moved to suppress | The procedure was not unduly suggestive (Ellison viewed multiple photos on the phone; statute noncompliance does not mandate exclusion) | Not ineffective — no showing the identification procedure was impermissibly suggestive or that suppression would have succeeded |
| Counsel ineffective for failing to call Detective Shuler to impeach Ellison’s testimony about a prior identification | Detective Shuler would have disproved Ellison’s claim or impeached his credibility; counsel should have subpoenaed/called him | Counsel strategically cross-examined Ellison and reasonably declined to call Shuler to avoid exposing him to State cross-examination and to preserve impeachment via cross | Not ineffective — strategic decision; counsel thoroughly cross-examined Ellison and calling Shuler was not objectively unreasonable |
| Cumulative ineffective-assistance claim | Combined omissions undermined confidence in the verdict | Neither omission was deficient, so no cumulative harm exists | Denied — no cumulative prejudice shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance test)
- Romer v. State, 293 Ga. 339 (2013) (objective-reasonableness standard for counsel performance)
- Mosley v. State, 307 Ga. 711 (2020) (burden to show suppression would have been granted)
- Williams v. State, 286 Ga. 884 (2010) (impermissibly suggestive identification standard)
- Waters v. State, 281 Ga. 119 (2006) (no need to reach misidentification if lineup not suggestive)
- Cartwright v. Caldwell, 305 Ga. 371 (2019) (failure to present impeachment evidence can be deficient in extreme circumstances)
- Miller v. State, 296 Ga. 9 (2014) (witness-calling decisions are strategic and rarely deficient)
- McDuffie v. State, 298 Ga. 112 (2015) (investigators often harmful to defense; reasonable strategy to avoid calling them)